Jump to content

Rick Young

Member Since 15 Jan 2003
Offline Last Active Apr 08 2017 08:40 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: ProIV Developer vs ssh

04 April 2017 - 03:00 PM

ProIV doesn't support direct ssh (planned for v9)


Got tunneling working.

In Topic: Entry Is too Long

28 July 2011 - 12:34 PM

Thanks ProIV Support for their quick response. Apparently this was a bug fix, that is being reconsidered. CRT_INPLEN_ERR=N in your .ini('s) works to suppress this feature.

In Topic: GU vs LU - cost?

04 April 2011 - 12:55 PM

Thanks for the input guys. I must confess, I "knew" the answer, but after RD's additional info, I didn't know it was "that big" of a hit. However, for this one-time import deal, I still chose to use the GU route for my own peace of mind to not lose the plot with any @COMP or fieldname issues. Customer reviewed the rules, and elected to cut down on a date range thereby excluding several million reads (i.e. 0.5 mill x "lots") - runtime is about 10-minutes. I may rewrite it all as an LU one day, for comparison purposes.

@kapoof/Rob - I haven't as yet played with Child filedefs (though was aware of their existence), and given time constraints, didn't feel it was a good time to learn about them - they do seem useful though.

@RD - I have considered readonly bootstraps - and in the perfect world of never Production coding or hot-fixing it'd be great - but...can't say never at this client's site :)


In Topic: GU vs LU - cost?

01 April 2011 - 01:53 PM

Regarding alternate files, what version are you on that alt files cannot be automatically created?

6.2. I guess it depends on what "automatically created" actually means...for this one-time deal, I have created a few alt filedefs for some of the files, and a quick'n'dirty utility to rename the field names in filedef and vipbm25. I'm basically - perhaps somewhat oxymoronically - doing "extra work" in the name of safety but being a lazy b*stard don't want to do too much extra work...

Under some time pressure (i.e. by about next Tuesday) to get this done (including testing) - but at the same time, going for a little education :) I'm pretty much done now - onto some testing soon.

Here's the guts of the scenario:
- client is pure pro-isam
- have 1 progdir and multiple datadirs, each with a different @COMP
- based on some user-defined simple and complex rules, have to pull some data from each of the datadirs, and drop them into yet another datadir with yet another @COMP
- I have a personal dislike of screwing with @COMP (call it paranoia)
- data is always going from FILE-A in datadir1,2,3 to FILE-A in new datadir
- hundreds of fields involved - some being directly imported, some "if rules" based on source datadir, some arbitrary hardcodes, and some "auto numbering"

I do have to say, I doubt there would be any way possible for me to get this done in the timeframe involved, if I weren't working in ProIV - perhaps even if I were working with an RDBMS. $0.01

Thanks for yor thoughts

In Topic: GU vs LU - cost?

01 April 2011 - 12:48 PM

Hi Lewis

Thanks for your reply. It's only 0.5 million calls each making a totally unknown number of reads. This is envisaged to be a "one time" deal, so maybe "cost" doesn't matter quite so much, upon reflection vs the human cost (mine) of creating a not insignificant number of extra alt-filedefs.

Have you - or has anyone - done any "clinical math" on this general scenario? I'm thinking maybe I should one day just to get a better feel for it.

I have read a little on that function caching in the doccos - but am going to wait until my client gets a secondary server (lesser spec than primary) up and running before I think about experimenting with it.