Accuracer C/S Database?
Shane Stump
(www.StumpWare).
Any how, I am getting ready to begin a new project for a client and it will
require a C/S database.
I have really liked the simplicity of Accuracer along with the support.
Is anyone using it in a C/S model? Any problems?
I am considering it but I am also thinking about the following other DBs:
1) NexusDB C/S
2) Firebird
All comments would be appreciated.
Happy Holidays,
Shane
www.StumpWare.com
James K Smith
so easy to customize the server, recompile, then deploy. I have one
installation with a 20 gig table going, and no errors.
James
"Shane Stump" <ShaneStu...@StumpWare.com> wrote in message
news:41b9d1fc$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Rui
Pierre Demers
> Local version is free, but c/s not:(
Ouch, he wants a C/S solution not to ruin himself with in servers licensing
:) NexusDb is definitly a by far a better solution. You can deploy c/s apps.
without any royalties. Plus, with Advantage local, you don't have the
transactions working, which is a big downer. I have used both and i can tell
you that both are rock solid but NexusDB is the way to go. :)
Pierre
Hannes Danzl
> the widely accepted definition suggests, but adds a "C/S" layer on top
> of a filesharing database. Mind you, that doesn't have to be negative
> depending on the size of the system you're planning.
Looking at their website, I might be wrong. Sorry, please ignore above, as
it seems they have a multi-user filesharing version and a real C/S version.
Someone please correct me if i'm wrong again ;)
--
Hannes Danzl (han...@nexusdb.dbnexus.com)
Nexus Database Systems Pty Ltd
(please remove the .dbnexus in the email to answer direcly)
Hannes Danzl
> Is anyone using it in a C/S model? Any problems?
All i can say is that to my knowledge Accuracer is not really C/S as the
widely accepted definition suggests, but adds a "C/S" layer on top of a filesharing
database. Mind you, that doesn't have to be negative depending on the size
of the system you're planning.
> 1) NexusDB C/S
> 2) Firebird
The biggest advantages of NexusDB are imo that you get
* full Delphi sources
* it is very easy extendable
* it needs very low resources
* and it's completely royalty free, means once you own it, use it for whatever
you want for as many customers and apps you want
At the moment, you can still get the 600US$ crossgrade price which since
Nov 10th (or so...) also includes a free Update to V2 once it's available.
The crossgrade price will raise to 750US$ once V2 is out. We're currently
preparing a public beta for V2, and it should be out in the next few days.
Hope that helps
Shane Stump
holidays.
Happy Holidays,
Shane
P.S. Will version 2.0 support all tables in a single file?
"Hannes Danzl" <han...@nexusdb.dbnexus.com> wrote in message
news:66094632383...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Shane Stump
I have gotten over 30 private emails telling me that NexusDB is my solution
so that speaks highly of your product! I actually registered it but have
never used it because of product requirements.
If all goes expected in my trials, I will be purchasing the $600 cross over
license in the next couple of weeks!
Happy Holidays,
Shane
www.StumpWare.com
"Hannes Danzl" <han...@nexusdb.dbnexus.com> wrote in message
news:66375632384...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Hello Shane,
>
>> P.S. Will version 2.0 support all tables in a single file?
>
> Not really. You're able in V2 to have subtables though, which in most
> cases has the same result. All system tables (triggers, stored procedures,
> ...) will be saved in separate files though.
Hannes Danzl
> P.S. Will version 2.0 support all tables in a single file?
Not really. You're able in V2 to have subtables though, which in most cases
has the same result. All system tables (triggers, stored procedures, ...)
will be saved in separate files though.
--
John McTaggart
requirements.
That just begs the question - why?
John McTaggart
Shane Stump
and it is a consumer product. My experience with consumer products is that
single file databases make life easier on the following fronts:
1) Support if the user needs to send you a database.
2) Backup.
Happy Holidays,
Shane
www.StumpWare.com
"John McTaggart" <john_at_compnet101_dot_com> wrote in message
news:41bb...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Hannes Danzl
> 1) Support if the user needs to send you a database. 2) Backup.
which both imo should be handled from WITHIN your applicaton :)
Shane Stump
The next project is for commercial clients so easy backup / send isn't a
constraint <BG>! In fact, I hope to NEVER see a client's database as that
means most likely I am in trouble.
Happy Holidays,
Shane
www.StumpWare.com
"Hannes Danzl" <han...@nexusdb.dbnexus.com> wrote in message
news:66598632384...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Tim Sullivan
> licensing
> :) NexusDb is definitly a by far a better solution. You can deploy c/s
> apps.
> without any royalties. Plus, with Advantage local, you don't have the
> transactions working, which is a big downer. I have used both and i can
> tell
> you that both are rock solid but NexusDB is the way to go. :)
Hang on there for a second. It depends on your needs. "Ruin" himself with
server licencing? Like the people who use Oracle or MS-SQL do? Please.
Also, from a purely features point of view, ADS is head and shoulders above
NexusDB: support for data dictionaries including relationships and default
values, support for other development environments, support for Netware and
Linux as well as Windows, telephone support and so on.
This isn't to say that NexusDB isn't a great product - I'm sure it is.
However, Advantage has a lot of advantages over the various royalty-free
options, and for the majority of my business that works for me. The cost of
the server is tiny compared to the cost of my product, so it doesn't "kill"
either my clients or me.
--
Tim Sullivan
Unlimited Intelligence Limited
http://www.uil.net
Hannes Danzl
> support for data dictionaries
of course in NXDB V1
> including relationships
in NXDB V1
> and default values,
dito
> support for other development environments,
ODBC and DBExpress Drivers, ADO.NET Provider, Wizards in Visual Studio, COM
Interface for direct Cursor Access, all there for V1
> support for Netware and Linux as well as Windows,
true, there's no Netware support
> telephone support
we think that our free "chat to the developers" support is far superior to
telephone support. You can paste code parts, send files and if we can't solve
a problem via the email, newsgroup or chat we are know to have CALLED customers.
> and so on.
please go ahead. I'm really interested in "all the features that Advantage
has but NexusDB (or DBIsam or Accuracer that is) not". I seriously doubt
you'll find that many.
> This isn't to say that NexusDB isn't a great product - I'm sure it is.
> However, Advantage has a lot of advantages over the various
same here, i don't say Advatnage isn't a good product. not at all. Look at
their history, you're not in business for so long if the product has no substance.
> royalty-free options, and for the majority of my business that works
> for me.
That's it. It works for you. And you should tell people about it, but please
keep up to the facts Tim.
> The cost of the server is tiny compared to the cost of my
> product, so it doesn't "kill" either my clients or me.
I fully understand what you mean. Even for developers of real small applications
the actual cost of any database engine is actually marginal. Just take the
average hourly income and see how many hours you can squeeze into these prices.
It won't be a lot ....
Pierre Demers
> Hang on there for a second. It depends on your needs. "Ruin" himself with
> server licencing? Like the people who use Oracle or MS-SQL do? Please.
You are right. I should have mentionned that if you don't sell your programs
over 10,000.00$ like yours( i remember a post from you somewhere), then the
licensing can be negligible. But if your apps. sell for under 1000.00$ that
you will find that it's not at all negligible. :) If you compare to Oracle
or MS-SQL then Advantage is not pricy at all. Thanks for clarifying.
Pierre Demers
Alex Wong (ADS)
"Hannes Danzl" <han...@nexusdb.dbnexus.com> wrote in message
news:66721632385...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Hi Tim.
>
>> support for data dictionaries
>
> of course in NXDB V1
>
I don't think the data dictionary in NXDB is the same as the one in
Advantage. The data dictionary in Advantage contains the meta data of the
database including the declaration of the referential integrity (RI), stored
procedure, views, users, user groups and database object permissions
including column level permissions, just to name a few off the top of my
head.
>> including relationships
>
> in NXDB V1
Correct me if I am wrong, but I read that the RI in NXDB is only a proof of
concept. It is very different from the way Oracle, SQL-Server or Advantage's
RI. You cannot declare an RI in NXDB. You have to program it in code and
re-compile the server. I am not sure about the re-compiling the server part
but I am certain about the programming part.
>
>> and default values,
>
> dito
Can NXDB use expressions such as Today(), Now() as default values to
timestamp a record?
>
>> support for other development environments,
>
> ODBC and DBExpress Drivers, ADO.NET Provider, Wizards in Visual Studio,
> COM Interface for direct Cursor Access, all there for V1
>
How about PHP, DBI and JDBC driver :)
>> support for Netware and Linux as well as Windows,
>
> true, there's no Netware support
>
Alex Wong
Advantage Database Server
Hannes Danzl
> I don't think the data dictionary in NXDB is the same as the one in
> Advantage. The data dictionary in Advantage contains the meta data of
> the database including the declaration of the referential integrity
> (RI), stored procedure, views, users, user groups and database object
> permissions including column level permissions, just to name a few off
> the top of my head.
i think they are very similar in concept. nexusdb also stores the complete
definition of a table in it's datadict. that not only includes fields, indices,
.. but also default value, validation, RI, FileEngine, RecordEngine, Encryption,
Compression descriptors (which define which engine to use for reading the
actual records). Essentially everything that is associated with "managing"
the table file.
> Correct me if I am wrong, but I read that the RI in NXDB is only a
> proof of concept. It is very different from the way Oracle, SQL-Server
> or Advantage's RI. You cannot declare an RI in NXDB. You have to
> program it in code and re-compile the server. I am not sure about the
> re-compiling the server part but I am certain about the programming
> part.
it's not a proof of concept. it didn't make it into the initial release and
since the changes would break the dictionary of older databases we added
it as a bonus. that's the reason for the need to recompile the server, because
you need to add *one* uses clause. you're right that in V1 there's no graphical
tool to define the RI constraints, you need to add them by code to the data
dictionary.
> Can NXDB use expressions such as Today(), Now() as default values to
> timestamp a record?
via the datadictionary and via sql (not full support in V1 but in V2) yes.
> How about PHP, DBI and JDBC driver :)
PHP module is there, JDBC only over odbc bridge, DBI no.
Alex Wong (ADS)
> Hello Alex,
>
>> I don't think the data dictionary in NXDB is the same as the one in
>> Advantage. The data dictionary in Advantage contains the meta data of
>> the database including the declaration of the referential integrity
>> (RI), stored procedure, views, users, user groups and database object
>> permissions including column level permissions, just to name a few off
>> the top of my head.
>
> i think they are very similar in concept. nexusdb also stores the complete
> definition of a table in it's datadict. that not only includes fields,
> indices, .. but also default value, validation, RI, FileEngine,
> RecordEngine, Encryption, Compression descriptors (which define which
> engine to use for reading the actual records). Essentially everything that
> is associated with "managing" the table file.
My point was not the concept is not similar but the difference in the
features supported by the data dictionary. Though I do see a distinction
worth mentioning - NXDB's data dictionary is related to the table while the
Advantage data dictionary contains thing associated with managing the whole
database which the tables are part of. Feature wise, you can correctly me if
I am wrong. As far as I know, NXDB does not support the features that I
mentioned, i.e. view, stored procedures, RI, user, groups and permissions.
There may be some basic permission related features in NXDB but not as
extensive as in Advantage which support READ, WRITE, MODIFY, CREAT, DROP,
ALTER and even column level permissions. And this can all be done using the
SQL or API without making any change to the server.
>
>> Correct me if I am wrong, but I read that the RI in NXDB is only a
>> proof of concept. It is very different from the way Oracle, SQL-Server
>> or Advantage's RI. You cannot declare an RI in NXDB. You have to
>> program it in code and re-compile the server. I am not sure about the
>> re-compiling the server part but I am certain about the programming
>> part.
>
> it's not a proof of concept. it didn't make it into the initial release
> and since the changes would break the dictionary of older databases we
> added it as a bonus. that's the reason for the need to recompile the
> server, because you need to add *one* uses clause. you're right that in V1
> there's no graphical tool to define the RI constraints, you need to add
> them by code to the data dictionary.
>
Can you declare an RI programmatically using SQL or API without re-compile
the server? I am sure that with the source code of the server, one can
implement any new features and re-compile the server but that is not the
point. The point is that if I set up my database to work with certain RI or
other contrains, the database server should enforce the contrains the same
way no matter whose server it is running on and who is making changes to the
database. With NXDB, that is not possible, the RI is only enforced by this
one server that the developer specifically customized.
>> Can NXDB use expressions such as Today(), Now() as default values to
>> timestamp a record?
>
> via the datadictionary and via sql (not full support in V1 but in V2) yes.
>
>> How about PHP, DBI and JDBC driver :)
>
> PHP module is there, JDBC only over odbc bridge, DBI no.
Thanks for the clarification. You responded to Tim's post with unqualified
yes's to all the differences he listed and declared that there is not many
differences between Advantage and NXDB. I just want to support Tim's
assertion. There are significant differences, at least with current versions
of both products. We will see about the next version :)
BTW, based on my unscientific sampling of your NG, I do think NXDB is a hugh
improvement over FF quality and feature wise. Congratulations. I don't know
if he still remembers but Geoff and I had a war of words over the quality of
the FF a long time ago.
Hannes Danzl
> My point was not the concept is not similar but the difference in the
> features supported by the data dictionary. Though I do see a
> distinction worth mentioning - NXDB's data dictionary is related to
> the table while the Advantage data dictionary contains thing
> associated with managing the whole database which the tables are part
> of. Feature wise, you can correctly me if I am wrong.
there it's defintely different yes.
> As far as I
> know, NXDB does not support the features that I mentioned, i.e. view,
> stored procedures, RI, user, groups and permissions. There may be some
> basic permission related features in NXDB but not as extensive as in
> Advantage which support READ, WRITE, MODIFY, CREAT, DROP, ALTER and
> even column level permissions. And this can all be done using the SQL
> or API without making any change to the server.
RI is already stored there, the other things are coming with V2, whereas
not all is stored in the dictionary, as we decided to keep some of these
in dedicated system tables.
> Can you declare an RI programmatically using SQL or API without
> re-compile the server?
yes you can from API, not from SQL in V1 (or not fully at least - parts are
there). the server recompilation is only needed *once* to add the RI support
to the server. it adds another descriptor to the dictionary, which identifies
the class that implements the RI on the server. NexusDB is actually an almost
complete abstracted framework of classes. You can register any number of
named implementations of a certain base class (like record engine, index
engine, key engine, validation objects, ....). when opening a "table" the
header is read, in the header is the version, and the dictionary classname,
the server engine creates a dictionary instance of this class which then
reads the datadictionary, which in turn has the classnames for all the other
stuff. For example V2 can read V1 files not because they are 100% compatible,
but because V2 includes the V2 AND V1 implementations for the record engine
(which is responsible for interpreting a bunch of bytes as record and then
instantiating a field class which again interprets the actual field data).
when reading a table the dictionary knows the version it has to instantiate.
same goes for indexes or ri. it's only classes that are instantiated at runtime.
well that's the simple explanation. in reality it's a bit more involved
> Thanks for the clarification. You responded to Tim's post with
> unqualified yes's to all the differences he listed and declared that
> there is not many differences between Advantage and NXDB. I just want
> to support Tim's assertion. There are significant differences, at
> least with current versions of both products. We will see about the
> next version :)
sure are. at least in NxDB V1. V2 adds a lot of new stuff like PSM/SQL, SQL
2003, SQL Stored Procs, Full RI from SQL, ... just too many to mention. the
public beta is out since yesterday, but unfortunately our server is playing
up at the moment :((
> BTW, based on my unscientific sampling of your NG, I do think NXDB is
> a hugh improvement over FF quality and feature wise. Congratulations.
Thanks. And dont' take all the talk as "Advantage sucks". That's not what
we think or mean.
> I don't know if he still remembers but Geoff and I had a war of words
> over the quality of the FF a long time ago.
I'm sure he remembers. And i guess you were right as the FF quality was never
tooo good. Well not really bad either...
Martin Brekhof
> "Ruin" himself with
> server licencing? Like the people who use Oracle or MS-SQL do?
Could you back this up with numbers?
regards,
Martin
Ole Willy Tuv
SQL 2003, SQL Stored Procs, Full RI from SQL, ... just too many to mention.
the public beta is out since yesterday, but unfortunately our server is
playing up at the moment :(( >>
Just to add to Hannes' comments. I've had the opportunity to work with
NexusDB V2 SQL for some time. The V2 SQL implementation is a beauty. Full
SQL:2003 compliance, SQL:2003/PSM procedure language, Core SQL Views,
Triggers and user-defined Procedures and Functions. I'm not sure if they
decide to include it in the initial release, but the functionality is there
to write user-defined procedures and functions not only in SQL procedure
language, but also in any .NET language, register the .NET DLL on the
NexusDB server in SQL code and call the hosted CLR methods in SQL:2003
compliant EXTERNAL procedure/function calls.
NexusDB V2 will be a powerful RDBMS alternative on the Windows platform.
Ole Willy Tuv
Andrea Raimondi
> assertion. There are significant differences, at least with current
> versions of both products. We will see about the next version :)
>
> Congratulations.
Hannes Danzl wrote:
> Thanks. And dont' take all the talk as "Advantage sucks". That's not
> what we think or mean.
Hannes,
I think Alex Wong and you deserve a public compliment for the
*informative*, extensive and *very* fair face-to-face between
different vendors.
I really, really, really hope to see more of this kind of face to
face in future, also regarding other products. They can just do
good to customers and to vendors.
Really, thank you.
And I mean it.
Excellent.
Cheers,
Andrew
--
Online thoughts blog
http://araimondi.blogspot.com
Jim McKay
>Hannes,
>
>I think Alex Wong and you deserve a public compliment for the
>*informative*, extensive and very fair face-to-face between
>different vendors.
seconded!!!
--
Regards:
Jim McKay
"My theory of evolution is that Darwin was adopted."
-- Steven Wright
Posted with XanaNews: Ver: 1.16.5.2
Tim Sullivan
>> server licencing? Like the people who use Oracle or MS-SQL do?
>
> Could you back this up with numbers?
I'm not sure what you're asking for. All I'm saying is that ISVs who create
software that runs on Oracle and MS SQL are not "ruining" themselves, and as
such those who develop with Advantage are not ruining themselves. The
comment was ironic.
Martin Brekhof
"> I'm not sure what you're asking for.
products (and Advantage has a higher price compared with Oracle as far as I
can determine).
regards,
Martin
![Ella Perelman [AidAim Software]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjW3PFj_WcbjH3xORdH5m-LUwxwGfJNe6aJrYMMlnEzlhCcocA=s40-c)
Ella Perelman [AidAim Software]
Hannes Danzl wrote:
> All i can say is that to my knowledge Accuracer is not really C/S as the
> widely accepted definition suggests, but adds a "C/S" layer on top of a filesharing
> database. Mind you, that doesn't have to be negative depending on the size
> of the system you're planning.
Accuracer has two independent locking mechanism, one for file-server locking and
another for client/server. It means you can open any number of databases in file-server
mode, client/server mode, or in file-server and client/server simultaneously.
Certainly, client/server locking works much faster than file-server scheme. When you
work with database in exclusive mode, Accuracer is really C/S database system. But in
other case, Accuracer enables you to open a database in file-server mode by other
users.
> The biggest advantages of NexusDB are imo that you get
> * full Delphi sources
> * it is very easy extendable
> * it needs very low resources
> * and it's completely royalty free, means once you own it, use it for whatever
> you want for as many customers and apps you want
The all aspects above are correct for Accuracer, too. But Accuracer also has the
following advantages:
* Both Client/Server engine with server component and easy-to-use multi-user
(file-server) engine
* Storing all tables inside the single database file
* Capability of database embedding inside the executable file
* Varchar and BLOB field types with optional data compression
* Strong database encryption with wide variety of algorithms and modes
* BatchMove component
* Reverse engeneering (tables to SQL script export)
* Backup and Restore support
* ODBC Driver available
* Windows / Linux cross-platform database engine
You can find full list of Accuracer’s benefits here:
http://www.aidaim.com/products/acr/acr_benefits.php
Nevertheless Accuracer has lower price:
http://www.aidaim.com/articles/db_prices.php
> At the moment, you can still get the 600US$ crossgrade price
Till the end of December, 2004 we can propose $395 crossgrade price for Accuracer VCL
CS Pro
and $255 for Accuracer VCL CS Std for all registered users of client-server databases
like NexusDB, DBISAM, Advantage -- please contact salesATaidaimDOTcom.
Best regards,
Ella Perelman
AidAim Software LLC
Database, networking, data compression and encryption
components for software developers.
Joseph Naughton
I'm using Accuracer CS Pro -- I'm happy with it.
Performance is good for me. Very handy product.
I've tried NexusDB then removed. It requires six components to just open one
table!!!
Accuracer is more convenient if you worked with BDE -- just use
TACRDatabase, TACRTable, TACRQuery instead of TDatabase, TTable, TQuery. CS
requires a server to be run, of cource, but you can easily switch to C/S
mode from single-user or multi-user. It's comfortable!
My advice: stay with Accuracer!
Best regards,
Joseph Naughton
Ivo Bauer
> I'm using Accuracer CS Pro -- I'm happy with it.
> Performance is good for me. Very handy product.
Congratulations!
> I've tried NexusDB then removed. It requires six components to just open one
> table!!!
I understand. It takes a lot of time to drop six components on a form. <g>
Seriously, I see this to be advantageous. When you work for example
with BDE, and just use TTable, then Delphi creates an implicit session
and database and whatever is needed in the background. I don't like
this 'feature'. Instead, I rather prefer to put these components on a
form and setup their properties explicitely.
> Accuracer is more convenient if you worked with BDE -- just use
> TACRDatabase, TACRTable, TACRQuery instead of TDatabase, TTable, TQuery. CS
> requires a server to be run, of cource, but you can easily switch to C/S
> mode from single-user or multi-user. It's comfortable!
And the exactly the same is possible with NexusDB (TnxSession,
TnxDatabase, TnxTable, TnxQuery, etc.). Switching from single user
mode to C/S can be done by changing single property (just changing the
local server engine to a remote one). Just take a little time and
look at the manual. :-)
> My advice: stay with Accuracer!
My advice: Go for NexusDB! Excellent components, excellent support!
--
Ivo Bauer
Software Developer
OZM Research, s.r.o.
http://www.ozm.cz/
Turn your Delphi application into Modbus client/server with ModLink!
http://www.ozm.cz/ivobauer/modlink/
Hannes Danzl
> The all aspects above are correct for Accuracer, too. But Accuracer
> also has the
> following advantages:
Ella, just for the record: above statement was not to list the feats of NexusDB,
but to point out the different concepts/main advantages over Firebird. It
was (as the quote clearly shows) not a statement in comparison with accuracer
or any other engine and in no means want to make Accuracer bad in this thread.
Hannes Danzl
> I've tried NexusDB then removed. It requires six components to just
> open one table!!!
Six is the full chain yes. It can be done with three while still maintaining
full control, if you want to.
It would have taken us about 10 minutes to supply a one component solution
and about half and hour max for a 100% compatible BDE solution by autocreating
the needed other instances internally (just like other engines do).
We decided against it for these reasons:
* no hidden automatically created instances
* easy upgrading from embedded to C/S
* less support calls - while this sounds odd, we haven't got a lot of support
issues on this matter which is completely contrary to our experience with
the BDE or FF way of doing things.
Esentially we *force* the customer to take full advantage of the resulting
flexibilty. We weight these 2 minutes extra work for customers against the
loss of scalability and expected support issues and came to the conclusion
that we want to enforce it.
Joseph Naughton
Did you test Accuracer? If no, how you can compare its convenience in
comparison with NexusDB?
The all you wrote is not a subject at all. Of cource, you can (and should in
some cases) use
TACRSession to control your database connections.
But as for me, it is very good if the product can save my time. No needs to
drop and tune superfluous components? Good! Can I do it when I need or want
it? Yes, of course! Most of known databases manage sessions implicitly.
But why I must think about memory management and tune SQL engine? I do not
want to make superfluous work.
I do not understand NexusDB and I do not want to learn it. I know BDE well
and I want to migrate easily from it in my new project. Accuracer works like
BDE, but supports advanced features I need (single-file database and strong
encryption of database file first of all).
What's why I use Accuracer, not NexusDB. It's my point of view and could be
the subject to learn for Nexus Developers Team -- I guess they are working
permanently to make their product better.
In addition:
NexusDB has no file-server mode. In some cases it can be more preferably.
Accuracer supports more compression modes.
Accuracer has advanced encryption capabilities.
NexusDB does not support single-file database.
NexusDB is much more expensive.
My choice is Accuracer.
As for the AidAim's support, I never saw the better one before.
Best regards,
Joseph Naughton
Hannes Danzl
> What's why I use Accuracer, not NexusDB. It's my point of view and
> could be the subject to learn for Nexus Developers Team -- I guess they are
> working permanently to make their product better.
We sure do and we sure listen to our customers. For this case please read
my other reply in this thread.
Eivind Bakkestuen
We have no problems with this argument. Seeing as your IP address places you
practically within walking distance of Ella's .ru office, it is only to be
expected. Our neighbours have good NexusDB support, too. :-)
--
Eivind Bakkestuen
Nexus Database Systems
http://www.nexusdb.com
Eivind Bakkestuen
> well and I want to migrate easily from it in my new project.
Actually, our TnxTable and TnxQuery components are *very* call-compatible
with the BDE TTable/TQuery components, so migrating from a BDE app to a
NexusDB app is very easy. Just put the 3 extra components on a master
datamodule, and you are well on your way to have a well-structured app.
--
Eivind Bakkestuen [NDD]
Please, no email unless requested.
Newsgroups searchable at www.tamaracka.com
Didier Largange
NexusDB,
>but to point out the different concepts/main advantages over Firebird. It
>was (as the quote clearly shows) not a statement in comparison with
accuracer
>or any other engine and in no means want to make Accuracer bad in this
thread.
I've just read this thread, and I must say that my impression is rather
the opposite... It looks like a battle field, everybody shooting on Aidaim.
Also stating erroneous facts about a competing product, and retract them 3
minutes later after refering to their website is not very cool.
I'm using either Accuracer and Firebird in my projects depending the need
for encryption. I'm really satisfied, also because the support is
excellent, and the product really simple to use.
A agree, Nexus is impressive. As for products like RemObjects, it deserves
respect for elegancy of design and extensibility. I'm a bit disappointed
about the persistant lack of single file option that I had heared would
be coming monthes ago.
In fact I beleive that Accuracer don't have many direct competitors
because of its great pricing giving its capabilities.
Regards,
Didier
--- posted by geoForum on http://delphi.newswhat.com
Hannes Danzl
> I've just read this thread, and I must say that my impression is
> rather the opposite... It looks like a battle field, everybody shooting on
> Aidaim. Also stating erroneous facts about a competing product, and retract
> them 3 minutes later after refering to their website is not very cool.
I'm sorry if this is the case. Was surely not the purpose.
> A agree, Nexus is impressive. As for products like RemObjects, it
> deserves respect for elegancy of design and extensibility.
thanks for that :)
> I'm a bit disappointed about the persistant lack of single file
> option that I had heared would be coming monthes ago.
Hm. I actually am quite sure that we always strongly said that we favour
the multifile approach. We surely also said we'll look into it, but asfaik
we haven't commited to it.
Andrea Raimondi
> I've just read this thread, and I must say that my impression is rather
> the opposite... It looks like a battle field, everybody shooting on Aidaim.
I have been reading it all too, and honestly I didn't see the
same as you. I, instead, especially in a specific subthread, saw a
very interesting, fair and *honest* face-to-face between vendors,
something to be taken as example of what *should* happen when
they partecipate a thread.
> A agree, Nexus is impressive. As for products like RemObjects, it deserves
> respect for elegancy of design and extensibility. I'm a bit disappointed
> about the persistant lack of single file option that I had heared would
> be coming monthes ago.
I don't see the problem using SFS( just to say an AidAim product ) to
embed all files into one :-)
> Regards,
Regards,
> Didier
Ivo Bauer
> Did you test Accuracer? If no, how you can compare its convenience in
> comparison with NexusDB?
And did you tested NexusDB? Apparently not, since you said you
uninstalled it at the moment you discovered it requires sooo much
components to be present on the form/datamodule. Furthermore, you said
that you don't understand NexusDB (= your own words). So, could you
tell me how can you compare NexusDB against Accuracer?
> The all you wrote is not a subject at all.
It's sad you lack the ability to see it.
> Of cource, you can (and should in
> some cases) use
> TACRSession to control your database connections.
> But as for me, it is very good if the product can save my time. No needs to
> drop and tune superfluous components? Good! Can I do it when I need or want
> it? Yes, of course! Most of known databases manage sessions implicitly.
Agreed in both points. It's very good if a product is a time-saver.
It's also reasonable not to put unnecessary/superfluous components on
a form/datamodule. Unfortunately, I don't consider session/database
components to be superfluous. If you do, then it's your personal
problem. :-)
> But why I must think about memory management and tune SQL engine? I do not
> want to make superfluous work.
Pardon me? You consider tuning the application performance/memory
management superfluous? I always thought this is a programmer's job.
It seems you apparently need to feed with some facts. You don't need
to think about memory management when working with NexusDB because it
already comes with replacement memory manager which does all the grunt
work for you. Furthermore, session, server engine, database and other
components expose a couple of interesting properties which you may use
to tweak the runtime behaviour according to different scenarios. I'm
sorry but I don't find it superfluous.
> I do not understand NexusDB and I do not want to learn it.
So why do you talk about it, then?
> I know BDE well
> and I want to migrate easily from it in my new project. Accuracer works like
> BDE, but supports advanced features I need (single-file database and strong
> encryption of database file first of all).
As I already said this is much the same with NexusDB.
> In addition:
> NexusDB has no file-server mode. In some cases it can be more preferably.
> Accuracer supports more compression modes.
> Accuracer has advanced encryption capabilities.
> NexusDB does not support single-file database.
> NexusDB is much more expensive.
Hey! You said you don't understand NexusDB, so please restrict your
diffusion of words to those related to Accuracer. Thanks.
> My choice is Accuracer.
And guess what is mine? :-)
> As for the AidAim's support, I never saw the better one before.
Same here with NexusDB. I just love their NGs!
Yours respectfully,
Andrew Denton
> > As for the AidAim's support, I never saw the better one before.
>
> We have no problems with this argument. Seeing as your IP address
> places you practically within walking distance of Ella's .ru office,
> it is only to be expected. Our neighbours have good NexusDB support,
> too. :-)
And for someone with an very English-sounding name, Joseph Naughton's
posts read like they were written by someome for whom English is not
their first language.
--
Cheers,
Andy
"I want to move to Theory...Everything works in Theory"
Robert Cerny
news:41c6dda9$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
>
> And for someone with an very English-sounding name, Joseph Naughton's
> posts read like they were written by someome for whom English is not
> their first language.
>
Well, same is valid for you. :)
Typos do not necessarily mean lack of language knowledge.
--
Robert Cerny
DelphiShaman
Andrew Denton
I wasn't referring to typos - the sentence construction wasn't that of
a native English speaker.