Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.databases.paradox    |    To crash or not to crash, asks Borland    |    9,834 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 9,434 of 9,834    |
|    Robert Molyneux to Jim Hargan    |
|    Re: Help with Paradox 9 table schema    |
|    20 Aug 08 07:18:33    |
      From: ibisnestremovespambit@iinet.net.au              Jim Hargan wrote:       > Much here that is new to me! Like you, I use a lot of sub-directories for       > self-contained child databases -- so everything I use is always aliased,       > and therefore ends up hard coded.       >       > Jim Hargan       Hi Jim,              If you change the working directory to the child database, when you do       the linkage of tables for lookups you do not need to use aliases. From       then on, Paradox simply assumes that the main table and the lookup table        are in the same directory, and does not store the pathway.              Then you can reset the working directory, and still reference the tables       using aliases, with all relationships working correctly.              If you do use aliases, you can move the database from one system to       another provided that you can map the location to the same letter on the       new system as on the old. For example, I used to have all my tables       nicely set out in directories, heavily cross-referenced with aliases,       and all saved in Q:\Database_Directory. So long as I could snaffle the       Q:\ mapping there was no problem. But of course, generally this is not       acceptable.              Some years ago I suggested in this forum that (a) aliases were a really       great concept, and (b) the way they were turned into hard-coded paths       was a really great boo-boo - and got all sorts of strange responses...              In the Amiga OS (now THERE was a great OS) you could define symbolic       paths that all software including SuperBase (quite a good RDBMS) could       use - so you could have My_Main_Database and My_Handy_Lookup_Tables and       so on configurable. The nearest that M$ OS has are things like       MyDocuments and shares - but you really need to be able to define shares       within shares.              It would be handy to have a "directory" / "module" concept in CS       databases - that is, be able to put tables into logical groupings within       one CS database - maybe already there?              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca