This one exists for years already. About time for this one to get fixed.
To go short, without reading the entire story above, the Xojo MSSQL plugin is buggy.
when I started with Xojo, I wanted to make an application with the Oracle plugin.
I had problems and so I used .net
then I started a project with the Sql Server plugin and still I had problems.
Reading the forum, I realized that some issues remain unresolved for years.
I couldn’t risk it and so I tried MBS. it was the solution, for me.
In addition, whenever there was a possibility of a bug, or I asked for a suggestion, Christian helped me, via chat or email. Every problem was solved within 1-2 days.
Sql plugins play a key role in business applications, they have to work well and fast support is needed.
for my experience: IF Xojo doesn’t have the resources to do it all, they should focus the efforts on other things, which are already very important and complex.
Talking about the MSSQL plugin. I use the Xojo PostgreSQL and SQLite plugins, and a little bit MySQL for reading, and with these databases I don’t have issues. It’s the Xojo MSSQL plugin I would not use in any business project. And yes, MBS provides the alternative including quick service.
Naive question:
When writing windows apps in other languages, I have always used odbc and ole objects, which will be using the DLLs provided by Microsoft themselves.
What does the plugin provide (or fail to provide) that cannot be done in that way?
@Jeff Tullin : ODBC is slow.
it is good practice not to use spaces in table names etc. I always use underscore instead.
ditto
but it is supported by every engine and should work
see https://forum.xojo.com/54076-sqlite-field-name-handing-issue-causes-date-bug
[quote=438277:@Norman Palardy]but it is supported by every engine and should work
see https://forum.xojo.com/54076-sqlite-field-name-handing-issue-causes-date-bug [/quote]
Using both a space and a reserved keyword is just asking the SQL gods for trouble!
(Arghh, the board ate my last 2 edits, so here’s my point.)
Xojo has in the past enforced many programming constructs to ease development and pre-empt pitfalls for new and/or citizen programmers. I think a case could be made here that support for spaces or keywords in table or field names should simply be removed for the same reasons.
You are making an assumption that is not always true… Yes when we have control over the database creation that would be possible…
But we may need to be coding DB client apps for databases we did not create and do not control that may do things like that. After all it is a feature that many if not most databases are supposed to support and has been around a LONG time.
- karen
I get that
BUT this IS, when done per the particular DB’s standards, perfectly legal
And if you use a cmd line version of a tool to access that DB you can do it there
What you CANNOT do is use Xojo’s recordset interface to do the same update
That’s the bug
Quite right, and probably a common use-case. Perhaps if it had been enforced since the plugins’ inception… But since it’s supported it should work, period.
Sorry, Greg, I already spent 20+ hours trying to get the plugin to work only to find out it was seriously buggy. Why? Because I honestly thought I must be doing something wrong and it would be impossible for a company to advertise and release something so non-functional. Now, Xojo wants me to spend more time documenting and submitting reports? I’m sorry, my time is worth more than that, especially when there are already detailed reports in feedback that are four plus years old that haven’t been fixed.
Xojo is spending good marketing money bringing people in with the promise of developing business apps, most of which need database support for which MS SQL is a major player. This should work, without fail. Your marketing money is literally pushing customers into third-party products (Christian’s MBS Plugin) because Xojo core functionality does not work, while at the same time casting a poor light on your own product. It would probably be wiser to improve core functionality to keep existing customers instead of spending more money on acquiring new customers due to churn. INMHO not a good use of marketing money, but that’s your choice.
I really wish Xojo would forget about the new features and new platforms and take a release cycle or two and focus on fixing known issues. I love Xojo as a product but I sure wish the quality was better and a higher priority.
The vast majority of SQL DBs in the world were not created with Xojo in mind which is why that should not have been the case in any case.
From what we can see it looks like Xojo inc has not paid a lot attention to Database functionality in general in a LONG time…
I think they got too focused “modernizing the framework” and tried to change too much. While modernizing the framework is important for the long term, IMO they paid too little attention to making the functionality that really helps us get done what we need to do NOW is complete and solid first.
I suspect the Xoxo framework’s using different key data types (looking at you TEXT) was likely a significant contributing factor to that.
- karen
Thank you for your perfect analysis, Joseph.
That’s right. Why don’t they listen? That’s an incomprehensible position.