Flagged as primarily opinion-based.. ;P

Doesn't say SQL-92 compliant, only that it has at least some features. " SQL-92 Compliance The SQL-92 standard is imprecise with regard to arithmetical operator precedence; assumptions on this matter differ amongst SQL implementations. Caché SQL supports two system-wide alternatives for SQL arithmetic operator precedence: By default, Caché SQL parses arithmetic expressions in strict left-to-right order, with no operator precedence. This is the same convention used in ObjectScript. Thus, 3+3*5=30. You can use parentheses to enforce the desired precedence. Thus, 3+(3*5)=18. You can configure Caché SQL to parse arithmetic expressions using ANSI precedence, which gives higher precedence to multiplication and division operators than addition, subtraction, and concatenation operators. Thus, 3+3*5=18. You can use parentheses to override this precedence, where desired. Thus, (3+3)*5=30. Caché SQL supports the complete entry-level SQL-92 standard with the following exceptions: There is no support for adding additional CHECK constraints to a table definition. The SERIALIZABLE isolation level is not supported. Delimited identifiers are not case-sensitive; the standard says that they should be case-sensitive. Within a subquery contained in a HAVING clause, one is supposed to be able to refer to aggregates which are “available” in that HAVING clause. This is not supported. " -- Introduction to Caché SQL | Using Caché SQL | Caché & Ensemble 2018.1.4 – 2018.1.9[^]

Kent Sharkey wrote: That's so unlike Oracle. You are right, letting the features in the community version but change the EULA to not allow them in comercial software, then sueing everyone that uses them is more in Oracle's lines M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

Given the comparisons I've been reading about MySQL and Postgres, I would never touch MySQL. Which merely mirrors the same opinion I came to more than, what, 15 years ago or more? Latest Articles: A Lightweight Thread Safe In-Memory Keyed Generic Cache Collection Service A Dynamic Where Implementation for Entity Framework

He means 'intentional.' Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++ | Wordle solver

charlieg wrote: I recommend watching as many of these videos as possible: Toodaloo! - YouTube[^] Ahhh, that's it - thanks a million. I bumped into a few of them the other week and laughed my backside off. Then I couldn't remember what the channel was called and since I'd been watching in incognito mode, had no history. Soon as I saw the University of North Texas mug, I knew they'd be a hoot. :laugh:

Thank you so much Dear Ravi Bhavnani, You are truly amazing with very clear and comprehensive ideas, especially that you are not the person who discourages other, rather the person who encourages others to develop himself. I would liked to be in contact with you in private. As far as the analysis is concerned, I've already done the basics and I've also found that it's really a project that will solve several needs specifically in our local community. I'm then looking for the technology that can be best adapted to my project. Thanks again for your suggestions, guides and advice.

You'll be surprised, like taking a stroll with grandma. :laugh:

The choice between storing files in a filesystem or as blobs in a database depends on various factors, where both approaches have their own pros and cons to consider. Filesystem - Pros- Considered generally faster for read and write operations compared to databases. Much easier to scale horizontally by adding more servers with shared access to the file system. Cons- Handling backups and recovery might be more complex especially if it grows over time. Keeping file data and related metadata consistent can be challenging. Database - Pros- Easier to maintain consistency between file data and metadata in a transactional database. Database backups usually cover both file data and metadata. Cons- Retrieving and storing large files can impact database performance. You may face scalability challenges when dealing with a large number of files.

jschell wrote: Didn't even consider that. You know that's exactly how JavaScript "developers" will abuse it. If they have to make SQL usable with JS, it's because those JS developers lack, shall we say, the sophistication to use the tools that already exist and are better suited for the job. And if they don't have that sophistication, you know they ARE going to perpetuate the same mistakes they're already making.

This forum is for issues with the CodeProject website, and is the wrong place for your question. Please use https://www.codeproject.com/Questions/ask.aspx[^] for general questions. However, as you can see, you are missing a parameter value after "ID = " in your SQL statement.

Google for "Tally import data VB6" and you'll find that you have to export your MySQL data into an XML format that is Tally compliant. Once you have those file(s), Tally can import those file(s) directly. Don't even think of asking for code. VB6 has been dead for over 20 years now and I have never used Tally, nor will I ever. Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles. Dave Kreskowiak

You would need to figure out exactly which part is slow. Presuming that it actually a database call then you would need to look at the SQL statements that are being executed. And the environment. So if you are running 100,000 clients it is going to be far different than if you are running 1.

Using RegexBuddy (yeah, I guess I am falling into a hole here) the POSIX notation is perfectly acceptable, hence your [:alnum:]. I can substitute [:alpha:] there as well and I suspect others in the list are good actors. My brain infarct occurs though when I use Herr Gevertz' table of translations and try to replace the POSIX with his ASCII ([a-zA-Z0-9]) or for that matter UNICODE ([\p{L}\p{Nl}\p{Nd}]), neither of which work in his interface. Grand tool, RegexBuddy ... it's one of those feature-rich interfaces which swim with example/sample in the help volume. My only complaint is that searching through documentation for words has no highlight of the found set so I've got to print out the page and use my pdf search to locate all instances!

What Dave said and use ObservableCollections to have the UC's update "live". "Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I

Your app's connector could not connect to the database host, or it connected and failed authentication. TLS is a transport protocol, a newer version of handshaking or validating in more detail. TLS last I checked is at V1.3, and V1.0, V1.1 was discontinued, but that was years ago. If your database is hosted at home or in your shop, then that's a local connection, and could be a firewall blocking a port number for MySQL. If your using a cloud host, then perhaps they upgraded. But if you wrote the app personally, you should remember how that part works, and be able to fix it fairly quickly. EF has nothing to do with the connection to the database server. You can use Fiddler to watch the connection, or check error logs, there is something out there that will guide you. If it ain't broke don't fix it Discover my world at jkirkerx.com

I haven't compared different database engines since a long time ago. On my private machine, I still use an old MS SQL Server 2008 R2 Developer edition... At my last workplace, it was mySQL - oh my, I would not like to use it again. The more I had to deal with it, the less functional it proved, even for simple CRUD stuff. More than 10 years ago, I tested huge reporting queries in many different engines - Oracle and MS SQl Server were best, followed by postgres; mysql behaved worse than MS Access... Oh sanctissimi Wilhelmus, Theodorus, et Fredericus!