Well that's very fair to say, yes, I agree wOOdy. The very few problems I had over the years with VFP DBFs were caused by operating system issues.
On 11/28/2019 4:21 AM, Jürgen Wondzinski wrote:
DBFs aren't unstable. In contrary they are one of the most stable storage options we have. Simple structure, easy to read and write, fast access. As long as you use them locally, there's no better engine. And that's why ADS is stil using them: they have a pure local access with their C/S engine. What made them problematic and bad-mouthed are the classic multiuser network problems, with a real file-access and data-transport over cable or WLAN you are always prone to problems. Thus, it would be better to state: For local data manipulation / massage / extraction, VFP and DBFs are stil king; and for MultiUser you better use any kind of C/S.
wOOdy
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: ProFox profox-bounces@leafe.com Im Auftrag von MB Software Solutions, LLC Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. November 2019 15:17 An: profox@leafe.com Betreff: Re: So, about this VFPA thing...
On 11/27/2019 3:47 AM, Alan Bourke wrote:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, at 6:51 PM, Tracy Pearson wrote:
Charlie,
To respond to your wish for larger DBF capacities.
There's also Advantage Database Server (now owned by SAP) which lets you
work with DBF\CDX\FPT over 4GB.
Ever since I switched to MySQL (and later MariaDB) back in 2004, I've never wanted to go back to DBFs for major app tables. Never.
[excessive quoting removed by server]