Also, if someone is too dumb to install censoring software from the net, they're way too dumb to be writing legislation to deal with anything computer related.
Speaking of "self important", why do you think anybody else cares who's on your ignore list? No flame, I'm really curious why we should care:-)
Looking at your user bio, I see:
21 years old. Comp tech in training;). Unlike some, Slashdot is for me a news source, and not my life.
So, if its such a news source, why don't you scroll down and look for news? If you don't like the editorials, don't read them. Not all material presented here is meant to be read with dick in hand (adjust for gender as needed).
No flame, your just a 21yo pimply faced youth, and I'm trying to help you get a better perspective in life. Feel free to ask any questions, unless of course you already know it all, which I suspect may be the case.
The posting was copyrighted text, the folks here did the pragmatic thing and removed it, and went the extra mile and posted alternate resources.
Feel free to carry on the fight tho, put your own money and reputation on the line and publish all the copyrighted materials your heart desires, and we'll all give you our heartfelt support as the Christian Scientist folks cart away all of your personal belongings:-)
Plain old access has queries,
not views (although you can convert queries to views, you cannot connect plain old Access to views or stored
procedures on the server).
I didn't know that, if this is true, then yes, thats useless, looks like I'm going to have to load up and test this.
Have you noticed that the SQL Server query builder is entirely different & better? It has the tables on top,
then the field/operator/criteria in a nice table-like layout, and then the SQL is at the bottom.
No, your one up on me here.
The Access
Query builder is a mess. If you select more than four or five fields, you have to constantly scroll right & left.
True.
The field columns are fixed-width & cut off long field/table/view names.
On 97, you can vary the field widths, but does not save them:-(
I also hate that you have to switch
between the SQL view & the GUI view.
The SQL view lacks basic GUI functionality like Search & replace
(or even Ctrl-A).
If I was any good at SQL it would probably bother me more:-)
The only reasoning is to hide the SQL & hinder you from even learning anything about SQL.
For me this is ok, for what I do, I've rarely if ever even messed with the SQL view. The one thing I don't like is that all of your queries are lumped into one list, hard to accumulate lots of queries that way.
Check FreshMeat. I use a nice CommonLisp interface for PostGreSQL. There are many others out there, but
few offer the real benefits of plain-old SQL. The hardest part is the intracies of Joins, but that is like saying
COBOL or VB is hard when there are really hard things like C & Lisp out there.
C is much easier than COBOL unless you really love to type, however, COBOL rarely suffers from smash the stack attacks:-)
Access is adequate if rather pathetic on it's own. But it doesn't work well as a front-end, EVEN FOR M$
SQL Server. It can't handle tables! On any big view or stored procedure, the connection times out. So you
have to pass-through the SQL statements to SQLServer and retrieve the results JUST LIKE YOU'D HAVE
TO DO WITH HTML. I'm not sure if Access has this problem with MySQL, as I use PostGreSQL. I don't
know what that fucking AC has up it's ass, but you can be sure it's not pretty.
How about if the view was stored on the server in the first place, would access still time out? Just wondering...
Ok, I'll bite, wheres your point'n'click query solution?
As a DBA, you shouldn't provide one that uses the database. I'm serious -- a production database has no
business running SQL that hasn't been vetted by the DBA and run in a test database. The wrong kind of query
can bring production to a halt for a manager's whim, and get you in the hot seat to boot.
Well like I said, I'm not a db pro, but would security and views not help here? Is it an all or nothing thing? Do you really have to give root access to your data surfers? Are today's sql security models that inflexible?
That said, it's probably better to provide Microsoft Query and Excel rather than Access for "adh hoc query", if
your needs are sufficiently simple. Unless you know how to enter "passthrough" queries, Access insists on
reading entire tables and doing the filter/join itself. There is no better formula for poor performance.
Once again, can't you just offer up views to limit what access sees (and do the joins to boot)? I'd be very surprised if you couldn't offer up a solution other than putting extracts on the users desktop, but then again, your the dba, not me:-) I _do_ feel access is too good a tool for me to go tell folks they have to do reporting from an excell spreadsheet hehe
My only real experience here is with Oracle type security and views, and then not as a dba, I don't know what kind of sql the open source servers have available, do they not support views and some sort of 'permit' type security or whatever?
I'm not arguing, I'm asking, as I'm not a DBA:-)
While I have no experience with the opensource db's, in the Oracle world, I'd even try to put the datamart on the back end, maybe sync it with triggers or something. (Thats not saying that snapshots are a bad thing or useless, but by definition, they're not the live data.)
If you're the DBA and you've been given the responsibility of implementing the data storage at your company,
you should be the one who decides what system is used.
Gently explain this to your boss. Tell him you understand that he may have a preference toward Access, but
you know from past experience that Access will not meet your long-term needs and you recommend
something different.
Ok, I'll bite, wheres your point'n'click query solution?
If your boss still insists, it's time to move on. You work for a micro-manager and that's the pits. Trust me.
Depends. There are micro-managers who respond to logical / cost-benefit type discussions, and there are micro-managers who don't. But your argument says your the inflexible type here, so I'd hazard a guess you'd be cranky in any job. (Still only a guess tho hehe)
Sometimes having a micro-manager means they're interested in what you actually do for a living, it has happened to me, both good and bad.
*Shrug*
I think we're talking about Access as a front end
for an sql database, are you saying this doesn't work?
Access looked very nice hitting RDB on VMS, I thought it was just regular ordinary ODBC, although the connection trivia was pretty obscure.
Also, from 97's help file:
DAO 3.5 introduces a new client/server connection mode, called "ODBCDirect." ODBCDirect establishes a connection directly to an ODBC data source, without loading the Microsoft Jet database engine into memory, and is useful in situations where specific features of ODBC are required.
Additionally, even using Jets engine, you can 'paint' sql queries using the query-builder type thing, granted, I'm not an sql pro, so feel free
to correct me here, also I don't know squat about
office 2000 stuff either.
This is a nice topic, hope some folks do post their experiences, I really like Access for surfing data, and the open source databases are
looking great nowadays.
Actually, I code quite a bit and enjoy it, I go out of my way to learn new languages. It is just I don't want to
spend the rest of my life coding in front of a screen, I enjoy the variety presented to me by being a
sysadmin. In almost all of my CSCI classes I was the only person who could consistently code programs to
work the way they were intended without just playing around hoping I hit on something that worked. Jason
Kavanaugh
So post the name of your college so that we can ridicule it!
Well, I've read her book, and its loaded with references, alot of it from the church itself, which has on
occasion admitted the preexistence of the christian fable. The explanation: the devil got their first to try to
fool christians. Ha ha.
Well you have a heads up on me, having read her book and done the research to confirm her references.
Also, ever heard of 'pious fraud'?
Nope, news to me.
I'm still studying of course. It was life changing for me in that I suddenly became interested in the histories
and evolutions of religious organizations, along with the relationship between the gods and the stars which I
find endlessly fascinating.
Well heres where you and me differ I guess, I really do not study religious organizations.
By the way, the author, who uses the pseudonym Acharya S. is a mythologist, archeologist, historian and
linguist. I've taken some time to check some of her claims in the essay, and so far everything has checked
out.
The cited page used one set of documents to prove another set false. Its worth noting how one set of documents are stone solid authentic, while the other set of documents are frauds.
Additionally, parallels were drawn between the story of the Bible and 'myths'. Theres always reliance on the logic that: if the myth predated the times of Jesus, then any similarities between the life of Jesus and the myths means that both are false.
However this assumes that if a religious organization were somehow proven to be fraudulent, it would be conclusive evidence to the fraud of Christ. Shakey at best. Also, any example of myths predating life events of Christ proves His nonexistance. I've seen that one before too.
That said, I'll agree that you probably have put more time and effort into this than I have, and you seem to be the studious type, so don't let me ruin your fun:-)
Oh, and when you say 'biased', do you include anyone who has formed an opinion (based on their
research) that is contrary to what you want to beleive? I mean, shouldn't you do some research yourself
before you start slinging ad hominems?
I'd say the author is probably just as biased as me the reader:-) Don't forget also, I am the _reader_, ie., the customer. It is up to the author to convince me. If 'slinging ad hominems' means giving my opinion on the article, then I don't need research, I'm not the one presenting the case, I'm the audience giving my reaction.
I'm also saying that the tone of the article seemed _to me_ to be preaching to the choir, ie., addressed to folks already wanting to believe what she says. There was nothing in this article to draw me in, so I wasn't 'sold.'
Maybe I'd be more convinced if it was shown just where this Jesus phenomenum actually came from, and not just dismiss it as the 'Republican horoscope' so to speak;-)
And don't forget the ever present Christian argument that the author is probably possessed by demons or otherwised influenced by Satan to deceive. Hope that helps!
Well purely subjective for me, there was nothing on the page that jumped out at me saying "eureka!"
No life changing revelations, etc... Most of the references cited seemed to be pretty biased themselves. Typically venomously anti-religion, typical in what you'd see in your average alt.atheist flame thread. Just seems to me to be another fellow pissed off cause God hates him or something. *yawn*
Most of the folks advocating atheist viewpoints have a vested interest in them, most likely behaviour related, such as being a slut, homo, or drug addict. Hope that helps!
I urge you to read the following essay. I'm not christian, never have been, and my life was still forever
changed by the thorough and fearless debunking found at:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
That page was an interesting read, but didn't have much credibility. Folks _do_ tend to put in lots of effort to disprove God's existance tho, I've always theorized that they wanted a rational to living like ho's:-)
There is a huge difference, you know, between me and you. You refuse to believe a theory that isn't
'proven' well enough for you, although there is a lot of evidence for us to tentatively believe it. I refuse to
believe in a fairy tale, which most people agree is worthless without 'faith'. There is simply no use in
believing in God based on any degree of proof without faith. You're not going to install faith in me, and
without that I *can't* believe your version of events. But all I have to do to show you you are mistaken is
provide you with a little bit more evidence, and close one or two loopholes you *think* exist in the theory
of evolution. Which one is more likely?
The fact that you are able to post lends a bit more credibility to the theory of evolution. (You _are_ the missing link, right?)
Don't forget simple microcode designs using eproms, where with a few extra gates and latches, you use parts of the eproms memory and other stuff fed back in to get the next address. Basically like the 'microsequencer' stuff at the heart of many cpu designs.
I believe you are confusing Free with Unrestricted.
In the United States we have Freedom of the Press. However, that right comes with responsibilities. If a
newspaper publishes a story stating that Richard Stallman is a Communist, and Mr. Stallman is not in fact a
member of the Communist Party, he is well within his rights to sue the newspaper for libel (or is it slander? I
always get the two confused).
This isn't the only thing you got confused:-)
BSD is a much freer license, yet I _still_ cannot use BSD-type licensed software to break into a bank, and guess what? They didn't even have to specify that in the license! So what was your point again?
Slashdot Mirror
Also, if someone is too dumb to install censoring software from the net, they're way too dumb to be writing legislation to deal with anything computer related.
Looking at your user bio, I see:
21 years old. Comp tech in training ;). Unlike some, Slashdot is for me a news source, and not my life.
So, if its such a news source, why don't you scroll down and look for news? If you don't like the editorials, don't read them. Not all material presented here is meant to be read with dick in hand (adjust for gender as needed).
No flame, your just a 21yo pimply faced youth, and I'm trying to help you get a better perspective in life. Feel free to ask any questions, unless of course you already know it all, which I suspect may be the case.
Feel free to carry on the fight tho, put your own money and reputation on the line and publish all the copyrighted materials your heart desires, and we'll all give you our heartfelt support as the Christian Scientist folks cart away all of your personal belongings :-)
speaking of www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/, I coulda sworn he was making license plates by now. oh well.
I didn't know that, if this is true, then yes, thats useless, looks like I'm going to have to load up and test this.
Nothing like looking dumb on the net hehe
No, your one up on me here.
The Access Query builder is a mess. If you select more than four or five fields, you have to constantly scroll right & left.
True.
The field columns are fixed-width & cut off long field/table/view names.
On 97, you can vary the field widths, but does not save them :-(
I also hate that you have to switch between the SQL view & the GUI view. The SQL view lacks basic GUI functionality like Search & replace (or even Ctrl-A).
If I was any good at SQL it would probably bother me more :-)
The only reasoning is to hide the SQL & hinder you from even learning anything about SQL.
For me this is ok, for what I do, I've rarely if ever even messed with the SQL view. The one thing I don't like is that all of your queries are lumped into one list, hard to accumulate lots of queries that way.
Check FreshMeat. I use a nice CommonLisp interface for PostGreSQL. There are many others out there, but few offer the real benefits of plain-old SQL. The hardest part is the intracies of Joins, but that is like saying COBOL or VB is hard when there are really hard things like C & Lisp out there.
C is much easier than COBOL unless you really love to type, however, COBOL rarely suffers from smash the stack attacks :-)
How about if the view was stored on the server in the first place, would access still time out? Just wondering...
Off topic I guess, but I like the query builder. Any good opensource query/report tools out there?
As a DBA, you shouldn't provide one that uses the database. I'm serious -- a production database has no business running SQL that hasn't been vetted by the DBA and run in a test database. The wrong kind of query can bring production to a halt for a manager's whim, and get you in the hot seat to boot.
Well like I said, I'm not a db pro, but would security and views not help here? Is it an all or nothing thing? Do you really have to give root access to your data surfers? Are today's sql security models that inflexible?
That said, it's probably better to provide Microsoft Query and Excel rather than Access for "adh hoc query", if your needs are sufficiently simple. Unless you know how to enter "passthrough" queries, Access insists on reading entire tables and doing the filter/join itself. There is no better formula for poor performance.
Once again, can't you just offer up views to limit what access sees (and do the joins to boot)? I'd be very surprised if you couldn't offer up a solution other than putting extracts on the users desktop, but then again, your the dba, not me :-) I _do_ feel access is too good a tool for me to go tell folks they have to do reporting from an excell spreadsheet hehe
My only real experience here is with Oracle type security and views, and then not as a dba, I don't know what kind of sql the open source servers have available, do they not support views and some sort of 'permit' type security or whatever?
I'm not arguing, I'm asking, as I'm not a DBA :-)
While I have no experience with the opensource db's, in the Oracle world, I'd even try to put the datamart on the back end, maybe sync it with triggers or something. (Thats not saying that snapshots are a bad thing or useless, but by definition, they're not the live data.)
Informative post tho!
If you're the DBA and you've been given the responsibility of implementing the data storage at your company, you should be the one who decides what system is used.
Gently explain this to your boss. Tell him you understand that he may have a preference toward Access, but you know from past experience that Access will not meet your long-term needs and you recommend something different.
Ok, I'll bite, wheres your point'n'click query solution?
If your boss still insists, it's time to move on. You work for a micro-manager and that's the pits. Trust me.
Depends. There are micro-managers who respond to logical / cost-benefit type discussions, and there are micro-managers who don't. But your argument says your the inflexible type here, so I'd hazard a guess you'd be cranky in any job. (Still only a guess tho hehe)
Sometimes having a micro-manager means they're interested in what you actually do for a living, it has happened to me, both good and bad. *Shrug*
Access looked very nice hitting RDB on VMS, I thought it was just regular ordinary ODBC, although the connection trivia was pretty obscure.
Also, from 97's help file:
Additionally, even using Jets engine, you can 'paint' sql queries using the query-builder type thing, granted, I'm not an sql pro, so feel free to correct me here, also I don't know squat about office 2000 stuff either.
This is a nice topic, hope some folks do post their experiences, I really like Access for surfing data, and the open source databases are looking great nowadays.
So post the name of your college so that we can ridicule it!
System administration is great for folks who can't carry a coding load. Hope that helps!
Well you have a heads up on me, having read her book and done the research to confirm her references.
Also, ever heard of 'pious fraud'?
Nope, news to me.
I'm still studying of course. It was life changing for me in that I suddenly became interested in the histories and evolutions of religious organizations, along with the relationship between the gods and the stars which I find endlessly fascinating.
Well heres where you and me differ I guess, I really do not study religious organizations.
By the way, the author, who uses the pseudonym Acharya S. is a mythologist, archeologist, historian and linguist. I've taken some time to check some of her claims in the essay, and so far everything has checked out.
The cited page used one set of documents to prove another set false. Its worth noting how one set of documents are stone solid authentic, while the other set of documents are frauds.
Additionally, parallels were drawn between the story of the Bible and 'myths'. Theres always reliance on the logic that: if the myth predated the times of Jesus, then any similarities between the life of Jesus and the myths means that both are false.
However this assumes that if a religious organization were somehow proven to be fraudulent, it would be conclusive evidence to the fraud of Christ. Shakey at best. Also, any example of myths predating life events of Christ proves His nonexistance. I've seen that one before too.
That said, I'll agree that you probably have put more time and effort into this than I have, and you seem to be the studious type, so don't let me ruin your fun :-)
Oh, and when you say 'biased', do you include anyone who has formed an opinion (based on their research) that is contrary to what you want to beleive? I mean, shouldn't you do some research yourself before you start slinging ad hominems?
I'd say the author is probably just as biased as me the reader :-) Don't forget also, I am the _reader_, ie., the customer. It is up to the author to convince me. If 'slinging ad hominems' means giving my opinion on the article, then I don't need research, I'm not the one presenting the case, I'm the audience giving my reaction.
I'm also saying that the tone of the article seemed _to me_ to be preaching to the choir, ie., addressed to folks already wanting to believe what she says. There was nothing in this article to draw me in, so I wasn't 'sold.'
Maybe I'd be more convinced if it was shown just where this Jesus phenomenum actually came from, and not just dismiss it as the 'Republican horoscope' so to speak ;-)
And don't forget the ever present Christian argument that the author is probably possessed by demons or otherwised influenced by Satan to deceive. Hope that helps!
Well purely subjective for me, there was nothing on the page that jumped out at me saying "eureka!" No life changing revelations, etc... Most of the references cited seemed to be pretty biased themselves. Typically venomously anti-religion, typical in what you'd see in your average alt.atheist flame thread. Just seems to me to be another fellow pissed off cause God hates him or something. *yawn*
On the behalf of all of the internet, I'd like to apologise for this attitude. The world should be more tolerant of wackos like you. Hope that helps!
Most of the folks advocating atheist viewpoints have a vested interest in them, most likely behaviour related, such as being a slut, homo, or drug addict. Hope that helps!
You can't get something from nothing. Case closed.
I urge you to read the following essay. I'm not christian, never have been, and my life was still forever changed by the thorough and fearless debunking found at:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
That page was an interesting read, but didn't have much credibility. Folks _do_ tend to put in lots of effort to disprove God's existance tho, I've always theorized that they wanted a rational to living like ho's :-)
Cheers!
The fact that you are able to post lends a bit more credibility to the theory of evolution. (You _are_ the missing link, right?)
Don't forget simple microcode designs using eproms, where with a few extra gates and latches, you use parts of the eproms memory and other stuff fed back in to get the next address. Basically like the 'microsequencer' stuff at the heart of many cpu designs.
ALL YOUR GRAMMAR FLAMES ARE BELONG TO US!!@@@
I know, score 0, redundant.
Your point is that you feel free to post baseless allegations and present them as facts. And you are correct, you can do this all you like. Cheers!
ALL YOUR GRAMMAR FLAMES ARE BELONG TO US!!@@@
In the United States we have Freedom of the Press. However, that right comes with responsibilities. If a newspaper publishes a story stating that Richard Stallman is a Communist, and Mr. Stallman is not in fact a member of the Communist Party, he is well within his rights to sue the newspaper for libel (or is it slander? I always get the two confused).
This isn't the only thing you got confused :-)
BSD is a much freer license, yet I _still_ cannot use BSD-type licensed software to break into a bank, and guess what? They didn't even have to specify that in the license! So what was your point again?