 | |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: The best webinterface for data editing -
07-22-2003
, 01:34 AM
|
Hi I'm looking for the best webinterface for editing database data, for example publishing a table with foreign keys shown as a dropdown. I don't care what database the interface is for (MSSQL, MySQL, Oracle, MySQL, Access, Filemaker, PostgreSQL, ...), and the price of the software is also "irrelevant", I just want the best piece of software. Any help would be greatly appreciated. What do you use? Note: Follow-Up is set to the newsgroup: comp.databases Kind Regards, Allan Allan Ebdrup |
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Hi Allen; I think you should take a look at "Webdata Pro" from Webteacher Software. [SNIP] |
Hi Rob
Do you actually use that software yourself, and if so for what?
Are you in any way associated with Webteacher or the development of "Webdata
Pro" ?
My first impression is that I find the software very slow and hard to use.
Kind Regards,
Allan Allan Ebdrup
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
My first impression is that I find the software [Webdata Pro from Webteacher] very slow and hard to use. |
don't get any idea on how it will work with a realistic number of
records. Testing with only a few records, I didn't feel it was slow.
Am I right in assuming taht the Webdata Pro is essentially a flat db
built around Perl scripts?
jp
--
#4
| |||
| |||
|
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
The world rejoiced as robyoung68 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com (Rob Young) wrote: The assumption in the last post is not correct. Webdata Pro is driven entirely by MySQL. It is fully relational and MySQL's speed excellent... Nonsense. It breaks rules 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12, meaning that, at best, it has _some_ coverage of only 1/3 of Codd's 12 relational rules, all of which need to be satisfied to claim to be "fully relational." If you look at the big names, you will find that Oracle and Sybase don't even claim anything about being "relational" on their front pages. IBM doesn't call DB/2 "fully relational." Nor does Microsoft. Presumably because they know that their products _aren't_ "fully relational." Even after having close to 30 years of experience implementing SQL-related technologies, IBM doesn't claim for DB/2 what you do for MySQL, and they are hardly comparable technologies. The main parallel is that MySQL licenses are priced remarkably similarly to DB/2 licenses, if you take a look at their respective "stores." |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
I stand corrected. From now on, I will refrain from using the adjective "fully" when stating that Webdata Pro is a relational software application. What it does offer is a convenient relationship management screen. Once the table joins are defined, admin can select fields from multiple tables in the report and form templates, and Webdata will calculate the JOIN query based on the selected tables. When adding or modifying a record in a parent table, a select list of child options automatically appears for the foreign key. |
refer to referential integrity or to graphical query builders.
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Now I have a question for you. A front-end Perl script has an opportunity to enforce referential integrity beyond what the back-end MySQL is capable of, especially for people still running MySQL version 3.x. If we add "cascade update" and "cascade delete" options, what would be the most useful sequence of enforcement. Should it immediately delete records from other tables when a parent record is deleted? Should it send an e-mail to admin asking for confirmation before deleting? What if a parent table is routinely replaced via batch upload, what happens to the orphan records then? Maybe admin should have an "orphan repair" utility which allows him/her to quickly step through the orphan records and assign a parent record or delete it. We could call it the adoption agency. |
transactions that require any kind of human interaction is a HORRIBLE
thing to do, so that the "email for confirmation" idea is pretty
heinous.
As for whether "CASCADE DELETE" is acceptable or not, that's a
function of the application. I have used it in some low-importance
tasks with databases that I'm perfectly happy to regenerate from
scratch.
Typically, in practice, the thought that deleting one record in a
table over here could lead to deleting 2500 records in that table over
there tends to make people break out in hives. "You mean, it could
lead to deleting a Whole Bunch of Data? I don't think I like that
idea..."
Those that care about data integrity would never consider "orphaning"
records; the wiser option is to refuse to delete the parent record.
Just because some idiot sales guy thinks he wants to delete the July
sales data doesn't mean that you should let him. And the sorts of
cases where referential integrity gets attacked are typically where
people who don't know what they are doing are trying to do something
dumb. They may never realize that they were inadvertantly trying to
delete all the data in the database.
Rejecting dumb requests is no error. Rejecting invalid input is no
error.
The bigger error is where someone running Windows Explorer
accidentally drags the departmental shared files into their "trash
basket." At which point it will happily trash every file it can get
its grubby hands on.
(Been there. Recovered from backup tapes. More than once.
Regrettably never was able to get any of the Price Waterhouse guys
that were, more-than-once, responsible for this booted off the site.)
I'm much happier when we start with:
BEGIN TRANSACTION;
SELECT THIS;
SELECT THAT;
DELETE FROM THIS_TABLE;
DELETE FROM THAT_TABLE;
DELETE FROM VITAL_TABLE_WITH_GOOD_CONSTRAINTS
*** Error: Referential Integrity Constraints on
*** VITAL_TABLE_WITH_GOOD_CONSTRAINTS violated. Rolling back ALL the
*** stupid changes you tried to make... ***
ROLLBACK TRANSACTION;
--
"cbbrowne","@","ntlug.org"
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/rdbms.html
He who laughs last thinks slowest.
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
The world rejoiced as robyoung68 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com (Rob Young) wrote: .... MySQL, and they are hardly comparable technologies. The main parallel is that MySQL licenses are priced remarkably similarly to DB/2 licenses, if you take a look at their respective "stores." |
Express.
From the IBM website I found the following price comparison chart from June
2003
http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/h...b2tcoudb.html:
"
The following chart based on a simple, 1 CPU installation, (we'll assume
Windows as some databases are limited to that platform) with varying numbers
of users. For ease of comparison, these costs reflect license only charges
and are based on published list prices as of 06/05/2003. Prices subject to
change. Based on the example below, DB2 UDB clearly offers the most
attractive price by a margin of at least 30% in all cases.
Scenario Pricing
IBM DB2 UDB Express MSFT SQL Server 2000
SEOracle9i SE
1 User $ 598 $ 813
$ 1,500
5 Users $ 994 $ 1,397
$ 1,500
10 Users $ 1,489 $ 2,127
$ 3,000
25 Users $ 2,974 $ 4,317
$ 7,500
50 Users $ 5,449 $ 7,967
$15,000
"
MySQL Pro costs $0 if you use it under the GPL license.
A commercial non-GPL MySQL Pro license costs $440. There are no limitations
on the number of users or the number of CPU's in the computer. Thus, MySQL
is by far the cheapest alternative.
In eWeek's web database benchmark 2002
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,293,00.asp
http://www.eweek.com/slideshow/0,367...o=1&i=1,00.asp
Oracle 9i and MySQL-4.0 topped in performance while SQL Server and DB2
lagged behind with a large number of users.
"
We used a Web-based bookstore application called Nile to generate database
load and stress-tested Nile using Empirix Inc.'s e-Test Suite 6.0 load
testing tool, with loads from 50 to 1,000 concurrent Web users.
"
Best regards,
Heikki Tuuri
Innobase Oy
http://www.innodb.com
Transactions, foreign keys, and a hot backup tool for MySQL
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.