Thread: Access 2002 and psqlodbc 7.03.02
Sorry for duplicate post if such occurs; I originally posted this via
news.gmane.org before subscribing to the mailing list.
I'm trying to use Access 2002 as a front end to postgresql on a small LAN,
with several local users and a few intermittent users via VPN from home.
Server : SCO OSR 5.0.7
postgresql 7.3.4 - binary version that came with a recent
SCO update; will build a new version from source when time
allows.
Workstations: XP Pro or Windows 2000
cygwin version 7.4.1 on two XP boxes, along with
PGAdminIII and psqlodbc 7.03.02.
Hope to asynchronously replicate from the server to the Windows boxes at
night, in addition to server DAT and DVD backups. The workstations will
eventually get Office XP Developer runtime versions of the planned Access
application.
Some of the tables will need something analogous to an Access autonumber
field. Postgresql sequences used to populate an int8 column seem similar. A
short VBA procedure could set the field value to nextval(sequence_name) as
the BeforeUpdate event for a data entry form. Would this be the correct
approach?
Should queries be passthrough whenever possible, for speed?
Thanks,
David P. Lurie
--- "David P. Lurie" <dbase4@hotmail.com> wrote: > Sorry for duplicate post if such occurs; I > originally posted this via > news.gmane.org before subscribing to the mailing > list. > > I'm trying to use Access 2002 as a front end to > postgresql on a small LAN, > with several local users and a few intermittent > users via VPN from home. > > Server : SCO OSR 5.0.7 > postgresql 7.3.4 - binary version that > came with a recent > SCO update; will build a new version from source > when time > allows. > > Workstations: XP Pro or Windows 2000 > cygwin version 7.4.1 on two > XP boxes, along with > PGAdminIII and psqlodbc > 7.03.02. > > Hope to asynchronously replicate from the server to > the Windows boxes at > night, in addition to server DAT and DVD backups. Why? In particular, why do you want to concurrently run local and server versions of the database? > The workstations will > eventually get Office XP Developer runtime versions > of the planned Access > application. > > Some of the tables will need something analogous to > an Access autonumber > field. Postgresql sequences used to populate an int8 > column seem similar. A > short VBA procedure could set the field value to > nextval(sequence_name) as > the BeforeUpdate event for a data entry form. Would > this be the correct > approach? No need, if you are using bound forms. On the one hand you will always have the primary key value handy, which may help you avoid some error cases. But then you need a network round trip to get it, for every insert. I doubt that it's worth the trouble. > > Should queries be passthrough whenever possible, for > speed? Yes. > > Thanks, > > David P. Lurie > > > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
Evening all,
It's been awhile since I felt the need to upgrade the ODBC driver...
But since we moved to 7.4.1 recently, I figured I would also upgrade the
ODBC driver...
However, I am confused..
http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/psqlodbc/genpage.php?downloads
Tells me that the current version is 7.2.3 except I have been
running 7.3.1 for awhile. 07.4.2003 is the file date..
So did I get to the wrong site from the postgresql main page, or is
there an HTML typo and the code is really 7.3.2 on this page ?? What is the
latest and greatest ?
Thanks for all the great work on this project !!!
JMS...
On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 22:28:05 -0500 "Jeff Silberberg" <jsilberberg@mindspring.com> wrote: > However, I am confused.. > http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/psqlodbc/genpage.php?downloads > Tells me that the current version is 7.2.3 except I have been > running 7.3.1 for awhile. 07.4.2003 is the file date.. I think the phrase "From version 07.02.0003" means "From version 07.02.0003 onwards" or "As of version 07.02.0003". Actually, the latest is 07.03.0200. I just recently upgraded, and hurriedly grabbed 7.2.5 without looking carefully at the dates. I'd already built and installed it before I realized that wasn't really what I wanted. :-) Cheers, Bob
--- Jeff Silberberg <jsilberberg@mindspring.com> wrote: > Evening all, > > It's been awhile since I felt the need to > upgrade the ODBC driver... > But since we moved to 7.4.1 recently, I figured I > would also upgrade the > ODBC driver... > > However, I am confused.. > http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/psqlodbc/genpage.php?downloads > Tells me that the current version is 7.2.3 > except I have been > running 7.3.1 for awhile. 07.4.2003 is the file > date.. ODBC driver version numbers do not correspond to PostgreSQL version numbers. Don't worry about it, and you'll be fine :-) > > So did I get to the wrong site from the > postgresql main page, or is > there an HTML typo and the code is really 7.3.2 on > this page ?? What is the > latest and greatest ? > > Thanks for all the great work on this > project !!! > > JMS... > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to > majordomo@postgresql.org subscribe and unsubscribe > commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
"Jeff Eckermann" <jeff_eckermann@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:20040311233802.42300.qmail@web20802.mail.yahoo.com... > Why? In particular, why do you want to concurrently > run local and server versions of the database? > > No need, if you are using bound forms. On the one > hand you will always have the primary key value handy, > which may help you avoid some error cases. But then > you need a network round trip to get it, for every > insert. I doubt that it's worth the trouble. > Thanks for the help; I'll use bound forms and passthrough queries. The replication question is probably best restated as a backup question: We will just run pg on the main (only) server, which has nightly DAT backup. pg would be available on the Windows boxes for temporary use in case of hardware failure. My thought was to have a pg_dump from the previous evening available, if needed. That should be sufficient for our small office. pg_dump piped through gzip could be run each night as a cron job, then burned to DVD with BackupEdge. BackupEdge would recognize the .gz file as compressed, and perform bit-level verification but not further compression, so readable with tar. The resultant tar archive could be copied to one of the windows boxes, the pg_dump file extracted with cygwin gzip and tar utilities, then loaded into pg for emergency use. Another option would be to copy the gzipped pg_dump file over the network, using a scheduled Windows Backup job or a simple batch file copy with Windows Task Scheduler. The pg_dump file would be written to a directory on the server accessible via Samba. I'm inclined to do both, as very easy to configure. Any thoughts? Thanks, David P. Lurie