Is anyone out there using ADT tables?

My company has used Advantage Database Server for years, but our data 
has always been in DBF format.  We were wondering if there would be any 
benefits to converting the DBFs to ADT format.

 From the research I've done in this forum and elsewhere, some 
developers have attempted to convert their DBFs to ADTs and abandoned 
the effort because it would require too many code changes.  From what 
I've read, ADT tables can be tricky because they store empty fields as 
null values, which can be a pain to handle, particularly in date fields. 
Also, ADT tables don't support record numbers, so DBGOTO() statements 
and the like will not work.

Has anyone actually gone through with converting DBFs to ADTs?  If so, 
was it worth it?  What advantages did you gain?  Are ADT tables 
significantly faster than DBF tables?  Were there any difficult 
obstacles that had to be overcome to make the conversion?  Did any weird 
side effects manifest themselves after the conversion?

On a related note, do you think ADT tables are suitable to handle very 
large applications (1000 simultaneous users or more), or is a more 
robust database needed (Oracle, MSSQL, Postgres, etc.)?

Thanks!

Chris Carmac

Hello Chris.
I saw how works ADT time ago and is a great solution.
Maybe you could use this: https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-ads.html together 
with https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-xclass.html
All product of this company are very good.
In fact I will program with theirs classes.
Too is possible to manage ADT with Odbc.
Best regards.
César.

"Chris Carmac"  escribió en el mensaje de 
noticias:1a5f668d$c898c9a$2046@news.alaska-software.com...

Is anyone out there using ADT tables?

My company has used Advantage Database Server for years, but our data
has always been in DBF format.  We were wondering if there would be any
benefits to converting the DBFs to ADT format.

From the research I've done in this forum and elsewhere, some
developers have attempted to convert their DBFs to ADTs and abandoned
the effort because it would require too many code changes.  From what
I've read, ADT tables can be tricky because they store empty fields as
null values, which can be a pain to handle, particularly in date fields.
Also, ADT tables don't support record numbers, so DBGOTO() statements
and the like will not work.

Has anyone actually gone through with converting DBFs to ADTs?  If so,
was it worth it?  What advantages did you gain?  Are ADT tables
significantly faster than DBF tables?  Were there any difficult
obstacles that had to be overcome to make the conversion?  Did any weird
side effects manifest themselves after the conversion?

On a related note, do you think ADT tables are suitable to handle very
large applications (1000 simultaneous users or more), or is a more
robust database needed (Oracle, MSSQL, Postgres, etc.)?

Thanks!

Chris Carmac

Thanks César!

After doing some research, I think we have decided to skip the ADT 
tables and explore PostgreSQL instead. That seems to be a better 
long-term solution.  Hopefully, the PostgreSQL DBE will help us make the 
transition. I've been investigating it this week, and it looks very 
promising. 

I appreciate your feedback.

Chris


On 3/2/2017 4:21 PM, César Calvo wrote:
> Hello Chris.
> I saw how works ADT time ago and is a great solution.
> Maybe you could use this: https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-ads.html together
> with https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-xclass.html
> All product of this company are very good.
> In fact I will program with theirs classes.
> Too is possible to manage ADT with Odbc.
> Best regards.
> César.
>
> "Chris Carmac"  escribió en el mensaje de
> noticias:1a5f668d$c898c9a$2046@news.alaska-software.com...
>
> Is anyone out there using ADT tables?
>
> My company has used Advantage Database Server for years, but our data
> has always been in DBF format.  We were wondering if there would be any
> benefits to converting the DBFs to ADT format.
>
>  From the research I've done in this forum and elsewhere, some
> developers have attempted to convert their DBFs to ADTs and abandoned
> the effort because it would require too many code changes.  From what
> I've read, ADT tables can be tricky because they store empty fields as
> null values, which can be a pain to handle, particularly in date fields.
> Also, ADT tables don't support record numbers, so DBGOTO() statements
> and the like will not work.
>
> Has anyone actually gone through with converting DBFs to ADTs?  If so,
> was it worth it?  What advantages did you gain?  Are ADT tables
> significantly faster than DBF tables?  Were there any difficult
> obstacles that had to be overcome to make the conversion?  Did any weird
> side effects manifest themselves after the conversion?
>
> On a related note, do you think ADT tables are suitable to handle very
> large applications (1000 simultaneous users or more), or is a more
> robust database needed (Oracle, MSSQL, Postgres, etc.)?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chris Carmac
>

Hello Cris, maybe PostgreSQL could be a good option but I think ADT is a 
great solution and possibly better than people generally think.
You can use indexes like DBF and too SQL, very useful the dictionary.
With the lib of ds-Datasoft (AdsClass++) is very easy to manage all of ADT.
The problem is that ADT is not free but if the company can assume the cost, 
I would think about to buy it.
Best regards.
César.

"Chris Carmac"  escribió en el mensaje de 
noticias:12356286$7c7ca1f4$23dd5@news.alaska-software.com...

Thanks César!

After doing some research, I think we have decided to skip the ADT
tables and explore PostgreSQL instead. That seems to be a better
long-term solution.  Hopefully, the PostgreSQL DBE will help us make the
transition. I've been investigating it this week, and it looks very
promising. 

I appreciate your feedback.

Chris


On 3/2/2017 4:21 PM, César Calvo wrote:
> Hello Chris.
> I saw how works ADT time ago and is a great solution.
> Maybe you could use this: https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-ads.html together
> with https://www.ds-datasoft.de/e-xclass.html
> All product of this company are very good.
> In fact I will program with theirs classes.
> Too is possible to manage ADT with Odbc.
> Best regards.
> César.
>
> "Chris Carmac"  escribió en el mensaje de
> noticias:1a5f668d$c898c9a$2046@news.alaska-software.com...
>
> Is anyone out there using ADT tables?
>
> My company has used Advantage Database Server for years, but our data
> has always been in DBF format.  We were wondering if there would be any
> benefits to converting the DBFs to ADT format.
>
>  From the research I've done in this forum and elsewhere, some
> developers have attempted to convert their DBFs to ADTs and abandoned
> the effort because it would require too many code changes.  From what
> I've read, ADT tables can be tricky because they store empty fields as
> null values, which can be a pain to handle, particularly in date fields.
> Also, ADT tables don't support record numbers, so DBGOTO() statements
> and the like will not work.
>
> Has anyone actually gone through with converting DBFs to ADTs?  If so,
> was it worth it?  What advantages did you gain?  Are ADT tables
> significantly faster than DBF tables?  Were there any difficult
> obstacles that had to be overcome to make the conversion?  Did any weird
> side effects manifest themselves after the conversion?
>
> On a related note, do you think ADT tables are suitable to handle very
> large applications (1000 simultaneous users or more), or is a more
> robust database needed (Oracle, MSSQL, Postgres, etc.)?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Chris Carmac
>

Cris, I could send you an example of a program with ADT with the tools of 
Datasoft.
Please, send me an email to my personal adress and we speak about this 
matter (ccalvoc@telefonica.net)
Regards.
César.


"Chris Carmac"  escribió en el mensaje de 
noticias:1a5f668d$c898c9a$2046@news.alaska-software.com...

Is anyone out there using ADT tables?

My company has used Advantage Database Server for years, but our data
has always been in DBF format.  We were wondering if there would be any
benefits to converting the DBFs to ADT format.

From the research I've done in this forum and elsewhere, some
developers have attempted to convert their DBFs to ADTs and abandoned
the effort because it would require too many code changes.  From what
I've read, ADT tables can be tricky because they store empty fields as
null values, which can be a pain to handle, particularly in date fields.
Also, ADT tables don't support record numbers, so DBGOTO() statements
and the like will not work.

Has anyone actually gone through with converting DBFs to ADTs?  If so,
was it worth it?  What advantages did you gain?  Are ADT tables
significantly faster than DBF tables?  Were there any difficult
obstacles that had to be overcome to make the conversion?  Did any weird
side effects manifest themselves after the conversion?

On a related note, do you think ADT tables are suitable to handle very
large applications (1000 simultaneous users or more), or is a more
robust database needed (Oracle, MSSQL, Postgres, etc.)?

Thanks!

Chris Carmac