I was introduced recently to the Advantage Database technology, and I now have to use it to interface with a legacy software on Win 7. I have successfully followed the advantagezone development help files in order to install both the ADS and the ODBC driver. A few questions remain, the first of which being the following: How does one change the password of a user/add a user?
I was unable to find any documentation regarding this matter. Could you point me to the relevant documentation or provide me with the command necessary to do so via command line?
Also I was wondering if there were any sort of GUI to manage the ADS, like MySQL has with PHPMyAdmin or the MySQL workbench.
Thanks for your help!
Advantage Database Server (ADS) uses a somewhat strange concept they've confusingly called a Data Dictionary (DD), which when used as designed controls users, rights, security, and access similar to what most DBMSs offer in the database itself.
Basically the only way to work with the ADS DD is through their GUI, known as the Advantage Data Architect (ARC32), which is available for download from the ADS Developer Zone. (You can do it via code, but for the types of things a DBA would do it's much easier to do things via ARC32.) Using it, you can create most of the types of things you'd typically use in a DBMS.
ARC32 also allows you to design your tables and indexes, as well as running SQL DDL and DML statements. The supported SQL grammar is also available in the documentation and covered in the book mentioned below.
You can find the documentation in ARC32 itself (using the Help menu or the ? on the toolbar), or via their Online Help FIles. The best place to start is in the topic The Advantage Developer's Guide, which is actually the entire contents of the book Advantage Database Server: A Developer's Guide. The book contains pretty good documentation on all of the aspects of both ARC32 and ADS itself, including use of the DD. Part 1, Chapter 4 has an entire section on adding users.
Related
I'm going to be building a custom interface for a QuickBooks Enterprise install (with Ruby on Rails). For example, we need to a have custom Estimate ("Quote") generator and later perform other functions as well. Before committing too heavily to the QBWC (QuickBooks Web Connector), I am hoping to understand any limitations that might exist.
Is there anything that the QBWC cannot do that can only be accomplished through the QuickBooks Enterprise interface itself?
I assume that there may be some "administrative" tasks that might not be able to be done, but Intuit's developer support can't seem to succinctly answer this question and has left me with a "Just try it and find out!" approach. This, of course, isn't really acceptable in my situation since I must understand any constraints / limitations going into this planning and proposal before really digging...
One other peculiar note in the docs (old, 2009, QBWC documentation) is: "... for a developer to write their own go-between application, in effect, replacing QBWC with their own implementation." Is this viable and does anyone have any experience with this who could provide some context of what this means?
Is there anything that the QBWC cannot do that can only be accomplished through the QuickBooks Enterprise interface itself?
Yes, there are many things. A short list of examples:
QBWC cannot add users
QBWC cannot change passwords
QBWC cannot switch between single-user and multi-user modes
QBWC cannot change settings (e.g. it cannot change the QuickBooks company from accrual to cash basis, or enable/disable tax)
QBWC cannot tell QuickBooks to update to the newest version
QBWC cannot communicate with QuickBooks when you have two separate QuickBooks companies open at once
(I'm sure there are many more)
It's also important to understand that the Web Connector is built on the same tech that all integrations with QuickBooks are built on.
Which means if the Web Connector can't do what you need, then you're SOL - no other different method of integration will be able to do what you need either.
You'd be much, much better off spec'ing out what you actually need to do, and then making sure that functionality is there, vs. trying to weed out what you can't do.
Serious headaches, trying to get ejabberd to integrate into an existing Rails app to support the chat part. Hope anyone wich has gone true this could share some insights on how to best approach cause currently everwhere there are issues.
My goals:
1. Store all data in mysql database for easy backup
for this I have setup mysql usage for ejabberd using the mysql drivers so far so good
2. Easy add and remove users from each others roster ( add and remove friend connections ) for this I have setup module rest and mod_admin_extra to be able to do restfull calls to ejabberd from the rails app. The ejabberd admin module allows to add and remove users BUT ( overflow: https://stackoverflow.com/a/5229902/355281 ) This author says its not possible to store data in mysql Mnesia is always used by mod_admin_extra
3. Temporarily add users to each others list or preferrable have some temp room to add 2 users to so they can chat as long as this group exists. No idea how to approach this
Problems with all this
Seems not all data can be stored in mysql, so data shattering Mnesia & Mysql , very bad to have data in 2 places and be unable to easy backup the mysql database
Have to use rest module to do stuff to the database wich is on itself fine, but how to add 2 users to each friendlist is unclear to me.
Although ejabberd seems to be the most complete out of the box xmpp server I might need to look for another server that tackles above issues. This part of my project has been big headaches hope someone can clarify, provide some suggestions on how to approach.
for example:
If facebook used ejabberd how did they tackle these issues?
Is there a clean rewrite of ejabberd that tackles above problems? perhaps a commercial xmpp server with decent api and ways to add/ remove users and store data in 1 central location?
Since you're already using MySQL, you can just manage the roster using Rails/MySQL Directly.
If you don't wanna do it directly in the DB, which is totally understandable, you can connect to the server through bosh (http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0206.html), where you can do all you're asking for. There is a JS bosh client that you might be able to use as a guide to implement it in Rails, it's called http://strophe.im/
Regarding having the data in two places, you should have (or be able to have) all the roster specific tables in MySQL, additionally you can configure pretty much every persistent piece of data to be on mysql, I'd need to know more about your specific concerns and configuration to be able to elaborate more on this though.
eJabberd is highly configurable and extendable, in my experience (over 8 years working with eJabberd) you can basically achieve any kind of behavior one way or the other.
I'm searching for something of which I don't really know the name of.
From time to time, I have to develop a small tool for a small group of users which is basically a web frontend to one or two database tables. It's very basic and something which one could do in a spreadsheet (without the problem that only one user can have the file open at a time and something like Sharepoint is not available) or for what one would have chosen MS Access in the 90s. Google Docs would also be possible, but we'd like to keep our data in-house. (I for myself just use phpMyAdmin for that, but it's not suitable for not tech-savvy end-users.)
So I'm looking for a tool which generates/provides a forms-based Web interface for simple models or database schemes that I create. First, is there a common name for such a thing? And second, does anyone have recommendations (preferably open source and/or free)? The closest thing I've come to is the scaffold generator in Ruby on Rails, but it's very basic and not optimal since it's only designed for generating prototype could which one should edit later, and last time I have looked at it, it was not possible to differently updating your model, i. e. regenerate code for model changes but preserving the manual changes of your code.
Thank you.
You're looking for Web UI Framework. Look into http://agiletoolkit.org/
I'm getting into MVC and is wonderful, however, still need to decide what dabatase system to use. For many years my options have been:
1) MS SQL. For complex web applications. Example: A shopping cart or CMS.
2) MS Access. For smaller and simple ones. Example: a small product catalog, blog or news system.
I don't want to keep using Access, however, using SQL means using SQL Express if you don't want to pay more (my clients will not want) in SQL database hosting. But using SQL Express (when hosting supports it) get some some connection problems when many connections are opened (from your app and others hosted apps in the same pool).
I want to use LINQ, thats why now I'm forced to use MS SQL (express) in order to use LINQ2SQL.
Any suggestion on what database rather that MS Access or SQL Express can be used that doesn't require more hosting expenses? Otherwise I have to try Entities + MS Access. Thanks for your help.
Access is completely unacceptable for any website that expects to handle more than one user at a time.
http://www.15seconds.com/Issue/010514.htm
What are your requirements for the databse? Do you need it to be relational? How many simultaneous users are you expecting for your website?
I would either use MySQL or SQL Server Express.
Perhaps you can post the details of your SQL Server problem. We may be able to find a fix for it.
For most small to medium websites, I would definitely use SQL Express. Its free and within its remit, works just as well as SQL Server full version. We run innumerable websites with SQL Express.
Regarding Access, Access is no joke. It just depends how you use it. If I put #mattimus on a horse and told him to lasso a 450 kg cow (something I did on a daily basis as a kid), he too would be a joke. It's horses for courses, isn't it?
To dispell the Access misconceptions, that are based on ignorance and false snobbery, see:
Who Access really is (one very versatile cookie for a start)
Just don't use Access for a website. You don't need to. SQL Express is all you need.
You can use pretty much any database that you want with MVC. As other have suggested stay away from Access for web development.
SQL Server including the Express edition is a good candidate for small web sites. You can also look into MySQL and other cheap/free relational databases.
On an unrelated note, mi familia es de Merida Yucatan. :)
Like so many questions asked on SO, this one is like "how long is a piece of string?" You can't say really say what's appropriate except if you consider the environment.
For a read-only website, Jet/ACE can perform quite splendidly if you know what you're doing. Michael Kaplan's http://trigeminal.com is backed by a Jet database, but it's read-only. Back in its heyday, MichKa used to say he was getting 100K pageviews per day (or some number that was outrageously high, so far as I was concerned!).
But with a read/write site, you wouldn't be able to support nearly as many users.
That doesn't mean you could use Jet/ACE as the back end. If you have five users max, and it's an Intraweb app, you can be just fine with it.
I wouldn't want to use it myself, but it's not going to be a problem with user populations that are appropriate for the Jet/ACE database engine to begin with, and particularly if you manage your connections properly. Jet/ACE works better with a single shared connection than it does with constant opening and closing of connections (because of the overhead of creating and recreating the LDB file), so you have to code against it differently than you would with your standard server-based database.
Also, Michael Kaplan used to point out that via ADO/OLEDB, Jet was threadsafe, but via DAO, it was not. Use of ADO/OLEDB made it marginally acceptable as a back end for a web site, though I would tend not to choose it for anything other than a site that was very small or disposable, or where there were no options that were not outrageously expensive.
But the key point is that there is no blanket statement that can be made here -- whether it will work reliably depends entirely on the specifics of the environment in which you're using it.
Access is a joke. You should go with MSSQL, MySQL, or Oracle. I like MSSQL personally. Access is not designed to handle large operations and is ridiculously slow.
I am trying to build a CMS I can use to host multiple sites. I know I'm going to end up reinventing the wheel a million times with this project, so I'm thinking about extending an existing open source Ruby on Rails CMS to meet my needs.
One of those needs is to be able to run multiple sites, while using only one code-base. That way, when there's an update I want to make, I can update it in one place, and the change is reflected on all of the sites. I think that this will be able to scale by running multiple instances of the application.
I think that I can use the domain/subdomain to determine which data to display. For example, someone goes to subdomain1.mysite.com and the application looks in the database for the content for subdomain1.
The problem I see is with most pre-built CMS solutions, they are only designed to host one site, including the one I want to use. So the database is structured to work with one site. However, I had the idea that I could overcome this by "creating a new database" for each site, then specifying which database to connect to based on the domain/subdomain as I mentioned above.
I'm thinking of hosting this on Heroku, so I'm wondering what my options for this might be. I'm not very familiar with Amazon S3, or Amazon SimpleDB, but I feel like there's some sort of "cloud database" that would make this solution a lot more realistic, than creating a new MySQL database for each site.
What do you think? Am I thinking about this the wrong way? What advice do you have to offer in this area?
I've worked on a Rails app like this, and the way it was done there was named-based virtual hosts, with db entries for each site running. Each record was scoped to a site if necessary (blog posts, etc.) while users would have access to all sites running out of that db. Administrator permissions could be global or scoped to one or more sites.
You're absolutely correct when you say you'll reinvent the wheel a million times during the project. Plugins will likely require hacking on top of the CMS itself.
In my situation, it ended up being a waste of almost a million dollars of company money to build that codebase to run multiple sites while still being able to cater to the whims of each client site. It worked, but was not very maintainable due to the number of site-specific hacks that subsequently entered the codebase. You may be able to make it work if you don't have to worry about catering to specific client sites running on your platform.
In the end, you're going to need a layer of indirection to handle the different sites regardless of methodology. We ended up putting it in the database itself. If you go with the different-db-for-each-site method you mentioned, you'll put that layer in your code instead. I'm not sure which one is the better method.
I hope you're able to pull this off. I failed.
Also, as I learned today, Heroku offers postgres instead of mysql for rails apps.
There's James Stewart's Theme Support Plugin for Rails 2.3, and lucasefe's themes_for_rails gem for Rails 3+.
I just started using the 2.3 version and it's working well so far.