FiveTech Software tech support forums

Is it possible to execute create sql view through Fivewin and use the same?

Regards,
Milos

Try tdolphin, saludos...

mtajkov wrote:Is it possible to execute create sql view through Fivewin and use the same?

Regards,
Milos

Using ADO

Code: Select all  Expand view

  CsQL := "CREATE VIEW CUSTATE AS SELECT C.ID, C.CITY, S.NAME FROM CUSTOMER C LEFT OUTER JOIN STATES S ON C.STATE = S.CODE"

   oCn:Execute( cSql )

   oRs   := FW_OpenRecordSet( oCn, "SELECT * FROM CUSTATE" )

   xbrowser oRs
 

This worked perfectly with mysql on my pc.

Thank you for your reply, it works.

Regards,
Milos

I tried to open the view as:

USE CUSTATE VIA "SQLRDD" NEW

but does not work?

Regards,
Milos

No comments on RDDs
It appears the authors make the RDDs only for individual tables and do not allow to use the full power of sql.

thank you

nageswaragunupudi wrote:No comments on RDDs
It appears the authors make the RDDs only for individual tables and do not allow to use the full power of sql.

In adordd you can do it like this:

Code: Select all  Expand view

   cSql := "CREATE VIEW CONTACTS AS SELECT TABLE1.FIRST, TABLE1.LAST,"+;
            "TABLE1.AGE, TABLE2.ADDRESS, TABLE2.EMAIL "+;
            "FROM TABLE1 LEFT OUTER JOIN TABLE2 ON TABLE1.CODID = TABLE2.CODID"
   
   GETADOCONN():EXECUTE(cSql)
   
   SELE 0
   USE CONTACTS

   BROWSE()

 

You can do it also in traditional dbf way:

Code: Select all  Expand view

   SELE 0
   USE table1 ALIAS "TEST1"
   SELE 0
   USE table2 ALIAS "TEST2"
   
   GO TOP
   SELE TEST1
   SET RELATION TO CODID INTO TEST2

   BROWSE( FIELDS OF EACH AREA)

 

Mr Antonio

Thanks for the info. You have done a great work.
I shall download and try the new ADORDD as soon as possible.

Mr Rao,

I'm looking forward to your comments and ideas.

By the way what do you use as locking scheme in ado? Do you simply trust :locktype?

What I do is not probably relevant. Optimistic locking or batch optimistic locking or detached recordsets, depending on the situations, but never lock and wait for user-input.

Even ADS by default uses optimistic locking. Option of Pessimistic locking is provided to accommodate legacy applications.

When you are writing RDD, you need to provide for locking. The question is how to do it.

Whatever locking we request while opening recordset, the provider finally decides what locking is to be provided, which we know by querying the :LockType after opening. To my knowledge, adLockPessimistic is available only for serverside recordsets. Normally used for single records. There is no call for locking, but the moment any field is modified the lock is applied till execution of Update or moving the record.

So probably in our implementation, when reclock() is called, we can lock the record by assigning the same value to an updatable field. ( eg. oRs:Fields( n ):Value := oRs:Fields( n ):Value assuming this field can be updated)

Call to oRs:Update() also unlocks.

Im going to try it.
Thanks for the great and simple idea.

Now Im having a strange problem.
When comparing two dates :

if (ownd:numera)->dataultmov > dDataM

msginfo("Data do ult doc "+dtoc((ownd:numera)->dataultmov)+CRLF+;
"Data deste doc "+dtoc(dDataM) )
endif

They show the same date 28.04.15. What might be the reason?

I did not understand your question. Can you please explain more clearly?

[quote="nageswaragunupudi"
Normally used for single records. There is no call for locking, but the moment any field is modified the lock is applied till execution of Update or moving the record.

So probably in our implementation, when reclock() is called, we can lock the record by assigning the same value to an updatable field. ( eg. oRs:Fields( n ):Value := oRs:Fields( n ):Value assuming this field can be updated)

Call to oRs:Update() also unlocks.[/quote]

I´ve tested it and it works perfectly with adUseclient and adUserServer cursors.

So we never call :Update() in ADO_PUTVALUE and ADO_APPEND and the :Update is then called only ADO_UNLOCK. Right?

The app Im converting gets all the new records an locks and then goes through the Locklist array of each table processing each replace.
Since we move the record we lost the physical lock right?
Starting a transaction can eliminate this ?

nageswaragunupudi wrote:I did not understand your question. Can you please explain more clearly?

(ownd:numera)->dataultmov is 28/04/15
dDataM is 28/04/15

if (ownd:numera)->dataultmov > dDataM

msginfo("Data do ult doc "+dtoc((ownd:numera)->dataultmov)+CRLF+;
"Data deste doc "+dtoc(dDataM) )

endif

The code inside the IF should never be executed but it is and the msginfo shows both with the same date 28.04.15.

What might be the reason?