Message
From
29/03/2010 06:34:51
To
28/03/2010 18:13:47
General information
Forum:
Visual FoxPro
Category:
Coding, syntax & commands
Title:
Environment versions
Visual FoxPro:
VFP 9 SP2
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01457588
Message ID:
01457787
Views:
60
>>>>>>>>What would be the best way to make a software multi-companies. I use Stonefield Database Toolkit. Would SDT make things easier?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Overall Feedback?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Denis,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I definitely would recommend SDT. I have a vertical market application used by many different companies. And I use SDT in such way that even though the database is the same, different tables can have custom fields (additional fields) without me having to customize the application.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Dmitry,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes it could be a way to do it but what about creating multiple databases. 1 database per company. How could SDT manage this? Would it be able to still to manage this with the updates and everything?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>By the way I created another thread in the Stonefield category. You can also reply there if you want. I thought creating it in that category would be better suited for my problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>From Sergey's message I presume that he is not much in favor of putting records of multiple companies into the same tables. And I thought of another approach you might want to consider. Probably much more involved but still an alternative. You could have a suffix number added to the database container and all tables for each company "database". E.g. Database01.d??, TableA01.dbf, Table01, Database02.d?? and so on. Then whenever you open a database or a table you would need to have the code to use the name with the appropriate company suffix.
>>>>>
>>>>>HTH.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's a nightmare you're proposing.
>>>>Best is a company Id in the tables.
>>>>
>>>>Next best is one db per company
>>>
>>>What I was proposing is also one db per company, just using a certain naming convention.
>>
>>I suspect you are gong to get the best answer in the book, from Doug himself.
>>
>>One of my best FoxPro memories is picking Doug up at O'Hare one year when we were both speaking at WhilFest. A truly, truly nice guy. He knows about all there is to know about FoxPro, especially on the data side, and is not full of himself. It was a two hour drive to downtown Milwaukee and I don't think either of us shut up for a second. It really impresses me when people that talented come without ego.
>
>I have never met Doug in person (isn't he lucky <g>) but from communicating with him here and over email I have the same impression; very nice guy.
He really is. You meet some people in business, some big names in fact. who are pretty much jerks. Not Doug.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Overall Feedback?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Denis,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I definitely would recommend SDT. I have a vertical market application used by many different companies. And I use SDT in such way that even though the database is the same, different tables can have custom fields (additional fields) without me having to customize the application.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Dmitry,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes it could be a way to do it but what about creating multiple databases. 1 database per company. How could SDT manage this? Would it be able to still to manage this with the updates and everything?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>By the way I created another thread in the Stonefield category. You can also reply there if you want. I thought creating it in that category would be better suited for my problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>From Sergey's message I presume that he is not much in favor of putting records of multiple companies into the same tables. And I thought of another approach you might want to consider. Probably much more involved but still an alternative. You could have a suffix number added to the database container and all tables for each company "database". E.g. Database01.d??, TableA01.dbf, Table01, Database02.d?? and so on. Then whenever you open a database or a table you would need to have the code to use the name with the appropriate company suffix.
>>>>>
>>>>>HTH.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's a nightmare you're proposing.
>>>>Best is a company Id in the tables.
>>>>
>>>>Next best is one db per company
>>>
>>>What I was proposing is also one db per company, just using a certain naming convention.
>>
>>I suspect you are gong to get the best answer in the book, from Doug himself.
>>
>>One of my best FoxPro memories is picking Doug up at O'Hare one year when we were both speaking at WhilFest. A truly, truly nice guy. He knows about all there is to know about FoxPro, especially on the data side, and is not full of himself. It was a two hour drive to downtown Milwaukee and I don't think either of us shut up for a second. It really impresses me when people that talented come without ego.
>
>I have never met Doug in person (isn't he lucky <g>) but from communicating with him here and over email I have the same impression; very nice guy.
He really is. You meet some people in business, some big names in fact. who are pretty much jerks. Not Doug.