Re: [OT] Re: Read and weep

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2003


It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 53950
interpreted = N
texte = Phil, Check the archives. I have no desire in getting into an argument with=20 you on this topic. The many posts by other users speak for themselves. The simple facts are that it is not simple to setup. I have sent emails=20= to support with the errors I was getting with no positive results. On Nov 11, 2003, at 2:41 PM, Phillip Bonesteele wrote: > > I haven't seen any specific problems described with using WebDNA with=20= > SQL > Server via ODBC. We have not experienced any problems with any of the > customer sites we have done with such a configuration. > > Take a look at http://www.harman-multimedia.com > > Dual server network load balanced web farm running WebDNA, with a dual > server active/passive MS SQL Server cluster on the backend. It didn't=20= > take > anything special to make work, and it's been up for a couple of years=20= > now. > > Phil B. > > -----Original Message----- > From: CN Stuff > To: WebDNA Talk > Sent: 11/11/03 12:32 PM > Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Read and weep > > > On Nov 11, 2003, at 1:36 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: > >> Nitai @ ComputerOil wrote: > > [snip] > >>> I will even say, that PHP got so big, because they have a complete > SQL >>> (MySQL) integration done. This is mostly all what people care about. >>> Sad but >>> true. >>> Don=B9t get me wrong, but did you ever try to sell a very big = company a > >>> WebDNA >>> solution based on the flat files system. We have lost 4 pitches >>> because of >>> that. They all went with a system (less featured packed as ours) = with > >>> a SQL >>> database (because of their backends). >> >> Well, we do have the ability to hook into SQL backends... > > Unfortunately too many people have tried for YEARS to get WebDNA to > talk to an SQL database with no luck. It should not take 6+ months = just > to get that advertised functionality to work. > > Based on my personal experience WebDNA does in fact not talk to SQL > databases. And not just because I have not been able to get it to = work, > but based on how many have tried and failed and have ended up using a > different solution because of how difficult it is to get it to work. > > Dale ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

    
Phil, Check the archives. I have no desire in getting into an argument with=20 you on this topic. The many posts by other users speak for themselves. The simple facts are that it is not simple to setup. I have sent emails=20= to support with the errors I was getting with no positive results. On Nov 11, 2003, at 2:41 PM, Phillip Bonesteele wrote: > > I haven't seen any specific problems described with using WebDNA with=20= > SQL > Server via ODBC. We have not experienced any problems with any of the > customer sites we have done with such a configuration. > > Take a look at http://www.harman-multimedia.com > > Dual server network load balanced web farm running WebDNA, with a dual > server active/passive MS SQL Server cluster on the backend. It didn't=20= > take > anything special to make work, and it's been up for a couple of years=20= > now. > > Phil B. > > -----Original Message----- > From: CN Stuff > To: WebDNA Talk > Sent: 11/11/03 12:32 PM > Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Read and weep > > > On Nov 11, 2003, at 1:36 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: > >> Nitai @ ComputerOil wrote: > > [snip] > >>> I will even say, that PHP got so big, because they have a complete > SQL >>> (MySQL) integration done. This is mostly all what people care about. >>> Sad but >>> true. >>> Don=B9t get me wrong, but did you ever try to sell a very big = company a > >>> WebDNA >>> solution based on the flat files system. We have lost 4 pitches >>> because of >>> that. They all went with a system (less featured packed as ours) = with > >>> a SQL >>> database (because of their backends). >> >> Well, we do have the ability to hook into SQL backends... > > Unfortunately too many people have tried for YEARS to get WebDNA to > talk to an SQL database with no luck. It should not take 6+ months = just > to get that advertised functionality to work. > > Based on my personal experience WebDNA does in fact not talk to SQL > databases. And not just because I have not been able to get it to = work, > but based on how many have tried and failed and have ended up using a > different solution because of how difficult it is to get it to work. > > Dale ------------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/ CN Stuff

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

Top Articles:

Talk List

The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...

Related Readings:

writefile, csv, tab and excel import behavior (2004) template cache problem (1998) Summary search -- speed (1997) Using Applescript to process WebCatalog functions (1998) [SearchString] problem with [search] context (1997) Getting Total Quantity (1997) .txt file (2000) duplicate cart numbers (2002) Behavior with cookies (2001) Trouble with [Math] (1998) Superfilous Characters (1998) [WebDNA] [OT] File structure for purchased downloads (2010) BBEdit and WebCatalog 2.0? (1997) Where's Cart Created ? (1997) Navigator 4.01 (1997) Text data with spaces in them... (1997) Running _every_ page through WebCat ? (1997) FEA REQ: One .hdr, multiple .db's (2003) WebCat2: Items xx to xx shown, etc. (1997) [WebDNA] improvements (2015)