If yes, how do I set it up in the yml file? Thanks. - amateur Railist -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060818/6690a4e2/attachment.html
A chill runs down my spine. -----Original Message----- From: rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org [mailto:rails-bounces@lists.rubyonrails.org]On Behalf Of Jun Bueno Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 12:49 PM To: rails@lists.rubyonrails.org Subject: [Rails] Anyone used MS Access as db? If yes, how do I set it up in the yml file? Thanks. - amateur Railist -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060818/044905c7/attachment-0001.html
Scott Thorpe wrote:> A chill runs down my spine.^ What he said. Joe -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Scott Thorpe wrote:> A chill runs down my spine.Access really isn''t bad for small applications. And it''s good to learn on because if you can''t figure the SQL out for something, the query wizard will show you what you''re missing. -- Austin Govella Thinking & Making: IA, UX, and IxD http://thinkingandmaking.com austin.govella@gmail.com
On 8/18/06, Austin Govella <austin.govella@gmail.com> wrote:> Scott Thorpe wrote: > > A chill runs down my spine. > > Access really isn''t bad for small applications. And it''s good to learn > on because if you can''t figure the SQL out for something, the query > wizard will show you what you''re missing.It''s one of the worst databases to learn on. You want to learn on a database that enforces good habits right from the start and uses an SQL dialect that is as standards compliant as possible. Access has it''s uses, but Access and SQL just shouldn''t be used in the same sentence IMO.
I don''t remember Access having bad basic SQL (T-SQL), it was all the other crap like forms, etc., its absolutely horrible security scheme, and its almost complete uselessness used as a server. When I started using MySQL back in its 3.x days, I fondly recalled Access'' foreign key support. Joe -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
If you''ve got any say in it, I''d suggest you use SQLite in place of Access. It works fine on Windows and Linux, is rock solid under Rails, costs nothing, is trivial to implement (i.e. copy one .EXE and one .DLL into your ruby\bin directory) and is a much better fit as a small Web-app database. Regards Dave M. On 19/08/06, Jun Bueno <jun.bueno@neteller.com> wrote:> > > > > If yes, how do I set it up in the yml file? Thanks. > > - amateur Railist > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails > > >
On 8/18/06, David Mitchell <monch1962@gmail.com> wrote:> If you''ve got any say in it, I''d suggest you use SQLite in place of > Access. It works fine on Windows and Linux, is rock solid under > Rails, costs nothing, is trivial to implement (i.e. copy one .EXE and > one .DLL into your ruby\bin directory) and is a much better fit as a > small Web-app database.Why SQLite over MySQL? -- Austin Govella Thinking & Making: IA, UX, and IxD http://thinkingandmaking.com austin.govella@gmail.com
Julian ''Julik'' Tarkhanov
2006-Aug-18 23:20 UTC
[Rails] Re: RE: Anyone used MS Access as db?
On 18-aug-2006, at 22:15, Austin Govella wrote:> Access really isn''t bad for small applications.As often as small means "1 person who bought it and runs exclusively on Windows and has filesystem access and can manage ODBC" it might be workable. Please don''t. -- Julian ''Julik'' Tarkhanov please send all personal mail to me at julik.nl
Joe Ruby wrote:> I don''t remember Access having bad basic SQL (T-SQL), it was all the > other crap like forms, etc., its absolutely horrible security scheme, > and its almost complete uselessness used as a server. When I started > using MySQL back in its 3.x days, I fondly recalled Access'' foreign key > support.I''ll agree with that. Access has quite a nice query designer and allows you to quickly manipulate data with a decent GUI. Its often used as a data format, though I wouldn''t recommend it due to the required maintenance routine you would have to run periodically. Never build a production forms app with it though ! (been there, got the scars) I''ve recently used the Ruby DBI ODBC adapter with Access, and got it connected very quickly. No experience with non-trivial use however. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
On 19/08/06, Austin Govella <austin.govella@gmail.com> wrote:> On 8/18/06, David Mitchell <monch1962@gmail.com> wrote: > > If you''ve got any say in it, I''d suggest you use SQLite in place of > > Access. It works fine on Windows and Linux, is rock solid under > > Rails, costs nothing, is trivial to implement (i.e. copy one .EXE and > > one .DLL into your ruby\bin directory) and is a much better fit as a > > small Web-app database. > > Why SQLite over MySQL? >I''m assuming one of the reasons he''d want to use Access at all is because it''s a single file database, and there''s not a lot of data to deal with. SQLite is the closest match, and has a lot of things going for it as a Rails DB. A really handy feature of Access being a single file is that taking a backup of an Access database is pretty trivial - SQLite is the same. Backing up MySQL is more complicated (not much more, but definitely more). While MySQL is bigger, more powerful, ..., it comes with a different set of characteristics; it''s "more different" from Access than SQLite. In any case, it''s fairly simple to move from one database app to another within Rails, once you''re up and going. If MySQL rocks your boat, go with it and you''ll be absolutely fine. Regards Dave M.
FWIW, I recently migrated a legacy Access MDB backed app to Rails & MySQL. I found Navicat MySQL (commercial software) to be immensely helpful in exporting the data. Other options (CSV, etc) were trickier (mostly extended character set issues). I''ve done Access MDB apps in the past and would only do so now under duress. I think the SQLite suggestion is an excellent one, both in the general light-weight DB case, and in the specific single-file case if indeed that''s what the OP''s concern was. On 8/18/06, David Mitchell <monch1962@gmail.com> wrote:> > On 19/08/06, Austin Govella <austin.govella@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 8/18/06, David Mitchell <monch1962@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If you''ve got any say in it, I''d suggest you use SQLite in place of > > > Access. It works fine on Windows and Linux, is rock solid under > > > Rails, costs nothing, is trivial to implement (i.e. copy one .EXE and > > > one .DLL into your ruby\bin directory) and is a much better fit as a > > > small Web-app database. > > > > Why SQLite over MySQL? > > > > I''m assuming one of the reasons he''d want to use Access at all is > because it''s a single file database, and there''s not a lot of data to > deal with. SQLite is the closest match, and has a lot of things going > for it as a Rails DB. > > A really handy feature of Access being a single file is that taking a > backup of an Access database is pretty trivial - SQLite is the same. > Backing up MySQL is more complicated (not much more, but definitely > more). > > While MySQL is bigger, more powerful, ..., it comes with a different > set of characteristics; it''s "more different" from Access than SQLite. > > In any case, it''s fairly simple to move from one database app to > another within Rails, once you''re up and going. If MySQL rocks your > boat, go with it and you''ll be absolutely fine. > > Regards > > Dave M. > _______________________________________________ > Rails mailing list > Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060818/24eff89a/attachment.html