MartyConnelly
martyconnelly at shaw.ca
Thu May 31 19:36:05 CDT 2007
You might want to keep this one in mind as a solution Google Gears. http://gears.google.com It was only released this week, so it's bleeding edge ;) Google announced yesterday a new developer tool called Google Gears that will allow Google and third-party developers to take their Web applications offline. No direct ODBC solution built yet. So no easy hook to SQL Server or Access. These are API's called from javascript There are three core modules provided by Gears: a LocalServer for storing and accessing application pages offline, a Database for storing and accessing application data on the user's computer, and a WorkerPool for performing long-running tasks (such as the code that synchronizes data between your server and users' computers). The database is SQLite. It's a flat-file relational database that is gaining some popularity. It's commonly toted as a good quick db for Rails development, if you don't want to have MYSQL running on your machine. http://code.google.com/apis/gears/ Arthur Fuller wrote: >An excellent point, Bryan. I too have been there and done that, and it leads >me to the conclusion that the remoters ought to have their own local copy >which is synchronized whenever they succeed in a connection. I am very well >acquainted with the replication technology, and I deem you correct: that is >the best alternative, given the flakiness of the satellite connections. > >This means I need to roll out an installation, and Sage is not within >budget. I have a vbScript which can do most if not all of it, so I guess I >will try that and see how it works. A test case or three, load and go, see >what happens. We are still in test phase, so no result can hurt the real >data. > >It's been a while since I did Access replication, but I know the turf pretty >well, so a couple of slaps in the face ought to remind me of everything I've >forgotten. :) > >A. > > >On 5/30/07, Bryan Carbonnell <carbonnb at gmail.com> wrote: > > >>On 5/29/07, Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>>Preface: there are no stupid questions, only stupid people. Sadly, I >>> >>> >>fall >> >> >>>into this category. >>> >>> >>Which category? Stupid questions? :) >> >> >> >>>1. a local FE installed on every remote, all of which point to the BE >>>available by satellite, if and when the technology is working. >>> >>> >>Apparently >> >> >>>this is intermittent. I know nothing about this part of the app. >>> >>> >>What if the sat link drops while the user is in the DB? Isn't that a >>really good way to corrupt the BE? >> >> >> >>>2. In the event that the satellite connection is unavailable, it has >>> >>> >>been >> >> >>>mandated that the remote user should be able to fill in a Word form and >>>email that. (Precisely how I am to handle said emails and integrate them >>>into the system has been conveniently overlooked, but like George >>> >>> >>Smiley, I >> >> >>>plod on.) >>> >>> >>Have a look at >>http://www.databaseadvisors.com/newsletters/newsletter112003/0311RemoteDataCollection.asp >> >>That should give you most of what you need to get going in this >>regard. If not, just ask. I've been doing Remote data collection with >>Word for about 8 years. >> >> >> >>>3. In the absence of a reliable connection to HQ, then I don't see how >>> >>> >>this >> >> >>>can work without a local copy of the DB. I am certainly not against >>> >>> >>that, >> >> >>>but it drags in the replication technology -- which I have used and >>> >>> >>love, >> >> >>>but it costs hours to set up and every time I mention hours Client says >>>"Cheaper", and when I mention "Cheap" Client says "Not enough >>>functionality", or something like that. >>> >>> >>Good. Cheap. Fast. Give 'em the options and let 'em pick 2. >> >> -- Marty Connelly Victoria, B.C. Canada