On Tuesday 17 Aug 2004 23:33, Andre Truter wrote:

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 23:17 +0100, peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Tuesday 17 Aug 2004 19:17, John N. Alegre wrote:

...

What relational databases are in SuSE Pro 9.1. I mean things like MySQL. Are these installed and configured by default or is it a seperate install?

...

...

how about a data base that does not require an degree in database management to get it to work .. is that too much to ask ,

Do you need a degree in data management to use Postgres of MySQL? If you use the phpMyAdmin or phpPgAdmin web front-ends, then they are pretty easy to use. You just need to understand the basics of databases.

Or you can use OpenOffice as teh front-end via unixODBC and create tables, queries and forms graphically.

The database is just the backend. It is the front-end tools that make it clickety-click drag-'n-drop.

ReKall also looks like a nice front-end for databases, but I have not had a good look at the functionality.

I'm affraid to say that they ALL pale into insignificance (SP) when compared to the old Dbase III Plus system now i know it's an old dos prog but it blows the undies CLEAN OFF any thing you can mention i have tried them ALL to no avail , i dont need to know about SQL or quiries(SP) as long as i can enter records into the system and view /modify them in a decent form that will do but i can find nowt in the Linux world to do that . Grok Looked promising but it bombs out all the time . Linux IS the best thing to hit computing for a long time but issues like this are a Real pain in the Butt .. Pete . -- Linux user No: 256242 Machine No: 139931 G6NJR Pete also MSA registered "Quinton 11" A Linux Only area Happy bug hunting M$ clan PGN

peter Nikolic wrote:

On Tuesday 17 Aug 2004 23:33, Andre Truter wrote:

...

On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 23:17 +0100, peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Tuesday 17 Aug 2004 19:17, John N. Alegre wrote:

...

What relational databases are in SuSE Pro 9.1. I mean things like MySQL. Are these installed and configured by default or is it a seperate install?

how about a data base that does not require an degree in database management to get it to work .. is that too much to ask ,

Do you need a degree in data management to use Postgres of MySQL? If you use the phpMyAdmin or phpPgAdmin web front-ends, then they are pretty easy to use. You just need to understand the basics of databases.

Or you can use OpenOffice as teh front-end via unixODBC and create tables, queries and forms graphically.

The database is just the backend. It is the front-end tools that make it clickety-click drag-'n-drop.

ReKall also looks like a nice front-end for databases, but I have not had a good look at the functionality.

I'm affraid to say that they ALL pale into insignificance (SP) when compared to the old Dbase III Plus system now i know it's an old dos prog but it blows the undies CLEAN OFF any thing you can mention i have tried them ALL to no avail , i dont need to know about SQL or quiries(SP) as long as i can enter records into the system and view /modify them in a decent form that will do but i can find nowt in the Linux world to do that . Grok Looked promising but it bombs out all the time .

Linux IS the best thing to hit computing for a long time but issues like this are a Real pain in the Butt ..

Pete .

The modern databases and their GUI's are jobs for the DBA boys, they complicate unnecessarily something simple. I never got my hands on Dbase III, but I got a shareware MSDOS database to design my Hamradio log, it allowed me simply to enter the number of fields and the type of data and length quite intuitively. Right, I'm sitting at my transceiver and someone calls or I call someone. I type his callsign and all entries for that station appear on screen so I'm able to see what date, frequency, the guy's name, his rig, antenna and that his dog Freddy was barking into the microphone on the evening of 10th. August 1987, etc. I had never heard of SQL back then or if I had, I couldn't tell you what it was, but I was creating databases, tables, doing queries etc. I subsequently learned. Not that it's impossible to learn mysql or postgres, but I don't have the cycles to do that and retain that knowledge over a period of several months of non-use. About 7 years ago I was quite proficient at using postgres, but 7 years on, I can only remember something about setting up "postmaster" and that's it. What both Pete and I are looking for is something that is less complicated to set up and use. I bet after umpteen years he could go back to Dbase III and be productive or I can go back to the shareware and be likewise productive. If you are using a GUI, it should hide the complexity from you and allow you to concentrate on the end result. Just as a test, I downloaded dmast31.zip, a DOS database I found on google minutes ago, unzipped it and started it with xdosemu and I've created a simple database, made entries and done a couple of queries, no problem, no learning curve. Appreciating that you guys are not responsible for the state of the software we sometimes have to suffer and if you need it badly enough, you stick with it until you have a good degree of proficiency, but there are other things I'd rather tackle. May be I was spoilt by the ease-of-use available years ago and hence my puzzlement at the current state. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer =====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

Faber Fedor wrote:

On 18/08/04 01:59 +0100, Sid Boyce wrote:

...

The modern databases and their GUI's are jobs for the DBA boys, they complicate unnecessarily something simple.

May I jump in here? You guys are confusing topics based on terminology.

A database is *any structured set of data*. A phone book is a database. My recipe list is a database. /etc/hosts is a database.

What you guys are talking about are database MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. BIG difference! And no, I'm not just being pendantic.

How I manage my set of automative tools (oil can, gas tank, a screwdriver) is vastly different from how the 16-bay automotive center down the street manages their tools. We both have a database (of tools) but our needs are vastly different.

For Sid's hamradio log, PostgreSQL and MySQL are WAY overpowered. But I'd like to see Sid use his hamradio log tools to maintain 15 years worth of daily and monthly data from the stock market. See the difference?

...

What both Pete and I are looking for is something that is less complicated to set up and use. I bet after umpteen years he could go back to Dbase III and be productive or I can go back to the shareware and be likewise productive.

For people who don't need an SQL-based database, there are plenty of other choices. Since Pete is enamored of Dbase III (I'm an old FoxPRo guy, myself), he should look into XBase, which is the generic DBase and runs under Linux as well as Windows.

OK, I shall have a look at XBase, tried it some years ago, but it segfaulted and I never got to evaluate it.

...

If you are using a GUI, it should hide the complexity from you and allow you to concentrate on the end result.

And alot of GUIs do that. Which is why I'm at the command line more often than not. ;-) I for one, need that complexity. Then again, you don't, so we probably shouldn't be using the same tools.

Likewise, I use the commandline mostly, but for some peripheral activities, I just GUI them out of the way.

...

Appreciating that you guys are not responsible for the state of the software we sometimes have to suffer and if you need it badly enough, you stick with it until you have a good degree of proficiency, but there are other things I'd rather tackle. May be I was spoilt by the ease-of-use available years ago and hence my puzzlement at the current

That's like me saying "why do I need to buy all this ham radio gear and take tests and study and stuff? All I want to do is to listen to the baseball game. It shouldn't be this difficult". Well, it wouldn't be that difficult if I used the right tools, e.g. a transistor radio.

Not really, there some things you can't master, I've built most of my ham gear and test equipment over many years and enjoyed it, but some guys don't have the knowledge and even some with the knowledge would not want to spend the time and effort, so they buy ready made equipment and are mad about building antennas, yet others get everything off the shelf, all hams just the same, but with different needs. There was a GUI going back some years that made mysql easy to handle, too easy perhaps, so it was dropped in favour of the new tools and the old version didn't run with the new glibc - seemed like turf protection to me. Regards Sid. -- Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer =====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====

John Pettigrew wrote:

In a previous message, peter Nikolic wrote:

...

how about a data base that does not require an degree in database management to get it to work .. is that too much to ask ,

Install MySQL or PostgreSQL and also install Rekall. Using Rekall makes it a doddle. You don't need to know anything at all about how the back end works - Rekall does it all in the GUI. It gives you an Access- or FileMakerPro-like way of working with the DBMS.

The only things you need to be careful of are that you install the right conduit for Rekall (each database engine has its own conduit, which SUSE have packages as separate RPMs) and that you set the DBMS running using YaST's runlevel editor. Each DBMS probably needs a little configuring first, but MySQL (at least) gives you explicit instructions of what to do when you install it.

John

How about putting two of these suggestions together. Install Rekall and Rekall-xbase (the conduit). Then just run Rekall and have fun. The xbase conduit uses no database server at all. This would not be good for a large and/or complicated dataset, however, for a small personal database it works right out of the box. FWIW, I just tried this for the first time myself. I prefer MySQL and phpMyAdmin, but this seems to fit the bill for the OP. Louis

On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 18:33, John N. Alegre wrote:

On 18-Aug-04 John Pettigrew wrote:

...

The only things you need to be careful of are that you install the right conduit for Rekall (each database engine has its own conduit, which SUSE have packages as separate RPMs) and that you set the DBMS running using YaST's runlevel editor. Each DBMS probably needs a little configuring first, but MySQL (at least) gives you explicit instructions of what to do when you install it.

I have heard good things about Rekall.

Is it on the SuSE install disks even if not installed by default? How about the various conduits you talk about. Are they also on the install disks.

I have never been much of a DBA myself, however I do need the ability to have one DB on the LAN which is addressable via either JDBC or the Mac Os X Enterprise Object Frameworks from remote machines on the LAN including one that is the Web server. I have learned that security is much more solid if the DB is NOT on the same machine as the Web server and the access to the DB is via JDBC or Ent. Objects.

The complexity of the various client DBs I create is not that great. 4 to 8 tables max and 3 or 4 relations usually handle all my needs. Having a good GUI front end is a benefit and, IMHO, is one of the disadvantages of ORACLE, not to mention the little ORACLE quarks which make it much harder to learn.

Everything is already on the SuSE install disks... Rekall seems good till you start hittting a huge databases, (many giga bytes) then a few minor quirks change from anoying to Not usable... As to weither postgress or MySQL? I use postgress but that's out of historical reasons... At the moment I cannot tell you which is my preference never mind a tip as which would be better for you.... Can anyone comment on Admin Work Postgres versus MySQL? Can you investigate which connects easier to the Mac? Jerry

john ----------------------------------- John N. Alegre o Andante Systems o eCommerce Consulting o Custom Web Development <*{{{{}>< ------------------------------------

Jerome wrote regarding 'RE: [SLE] Re: Relational Databases with SuSE 9.1' on Wed, Aug 18 at 10:01: [...]

Can anyone comment on Admin Work Postgres versus MySQL?

I'm partial to adminning MySQL due to the better dump/recovery/fix tools, but Postgres has pretty well caught up in that area now. It's come down to which one you're more comfortable with recently, with MySQL getting transactions and Postgres getting toosl that don't suck so bad.

Can you investigate which connects easier to the Mac?

Both will run on OS X - grab the fink distribution (fink.sourceforge.net, IIRC) and install either one. I guess that's what was being asked? I'm running on an OS X box a live mirror of our main MySQL server, and it works very well. --Danny

peter wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Relational Databases with SuSE 9.1' on Tue, Aug 17 at 17:17:

On Tuesday 17 Aug 2004 19:17, John N. Alegre wrote:

...

What relational databases are in SuSE Pro 9.1. I mean things like MySQL. Are these installed and configured by default or is it a seperate install?

how about a data base that does not require an degree in database management to get it to work .. is that too much to ask ,

Ok, that's the trigger (seen this question about once every 3 days for too long now)... There are several text editors on a default system that have insert, update, delete, and search functionality. MySQL and Postgres aren't hard if one understands the concepts behind a relational database. If not, perhaps a text editor or spreadsheet (I like gnumeric) is more appropriate. I'm pretty sure that OpenOffice can also use several data sources for report generating, mail merge, etc, if that's what one's looking for. Basically, if you (anyone, not just Peter) can't be bothered to read the basic documentation for a full blown RDBMS, a full blown RDBMS is probably not the right solution for your needs. Check out mysql.com sometime. They have some nice documentation, it's searchable, and it tells you what you need to know. I want to write a program to reflash and tune the ODBII computer in my 1996 automobile. I don't gripe to GM that they made the protocol too hard to understand - I take the time to learn how the protocol works. This is similar to the people who keep asking for a simple interface to a complex system. Some things are complex for a reason. Not everyone has an innate understanding of quantum mechanics, even though it's not really a hard topic to grasp. Boiling it down to the Schrodinger equation does not get the whole idea across, but that's fine if you just wanna figure out where an electron will probably be in a few moments. Similarly, running an enterprise-class RDBMS is not as simple as putting addresses and phone numbers in a spreadsheet. It just isn't the same thing. DBAs learn stuff *because* DB administration is complicated. It's complicated because it needs to handle lots of situations that can't be handled with a simple clickie interface. Simple needs == simple product != RDBMS. --Danny, done ranting for a moment :)