Progress vs SQL

Yahoo Archive
1
> never been so happy as when I pulled the plug on
> my last AS/400.

Almost as happy. Readying myself for the final power down of the old HPUX/Unidata systems.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, John Driggers <waffqle@...> wrote:
>
> RPG.... sweet Jesus. I've never been so happy as when I pulled the plug on
> my last AS/400.
> *
> *
> *John Driggers*
> *High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking*
> *
> **:: 904.404.9233*
> *:: waffqle@...*
> *:: NO FAXES*
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:39 PM, <jdaniel1127@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Yes, I remember MANMAN and fortran, also remember BPICS and rpg....
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@...>
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:19:46 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
> >
> > >
> > > You're not old enough for COBOL! :-)
> > >
> >
> > I am and I maintained an MRP system written in Fortran[1]!
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
> > 1. MANMAN, which I think Infor owns now....
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
2
Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any I
can get.

Thanks
Kersten
3
According to Ben Nixon (Epicor's System Guru) he stated at Perspectives that
Progress is still faster, if tuned and optimized correctly, than MS SQL

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
kam4085
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Progress vs SQL

Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any I
can get.

Thanks
Kersten



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links
4
We have definitely struggled with the SQL database. Of course there are a lot of things that affect performance, from desktop to network to server. It also depends on the number of records it is scanning. For instance, our customer master can have up to 8000 Ship To's and when we bring up the record it can take up to 2 minutes. We also have up to 800 releases in any sales order and when you try to cut and paste that many releases from excel or enter them the system time can be excrutiating, if it doesnt lock up. This is due to programming that did not take into account the size of a file.

Overall, I would not recommend SQL at this time when using Vantage. Too many years of Progress database and programming to overcome

Scott Litzau <scott.litzau@...> wrote:
According to Ben Nixon (Epicor's System Guru) he stated at Perspectives that
Progress is still faster, if tuned and optimized correctly, than MS SQL

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
kam4085
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Progress vs SQL

Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any I
can get.

Thanks
Kersten

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
Yahoo! Groups Links






---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
When we went from 4.4 to 6.0 three years ago we did our trial conversion
on SQL because that's what we ran 4.4 on. It was awfully slow. So we
did another test conversion on progress and have been on it ever since.
If there is no pressing need for SQL, Progress is a great solution.
Besides cost of ownership being much lower, the upkeep of databases is
very easy.



Paul



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of kam4085
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 4:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Progress vs SQL



Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any I
can get.

Thanks
Kersten





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
I have personally witnessed over 40 installations of v8, most of
which used Progress but maybe 5-6 used SQL for different reasons.
Always SQL is slower but when tuned just right the slowness is
difficult to notice. The trick is tuning and there seems to be too
many unknowns when it comes to tuning v8 regardless of which database
you use - Monte Tomerlin

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Litzau" <scott.litzau@...>
wrote:
>
> According to Ben Nixon (Epicor's System Guru) he stated at
Perspectives that
> Progress is still faster, if tuned and optimized correctly, than MS
SQL
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of
> kam4085
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 3:05 PM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Progress vs SQL
>
> Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
> heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I
don't
> know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
> Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate
any I
> can get.
>
> Thanks
> Kersten
>
>
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You
must have
> already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report
Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
7
Kersten,
I would use progress. It is faster at this point. Epicor has made
some great improvements in 8.03.400 for SQL, but is still not progress.
Also, are you aware that Epicor does not have a tool to covert your
database from progress to sql or vice versa.


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "kam4085" <kmaclennan@...> wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
> heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
> know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
> Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any I
> can get.
>
> Thanks
> Kersten
>
8
If you go from 4-6 they do. Or at least they did.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of peterlv2002
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 10:59 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL



Kersten,
I would use progress. It is faster at this point. Epicor has made
some great improvements in 8.03.400 for SQL, but is still not progress.
Also, are you aware that Epicor does not have a tool to covert your
database from progress to sql or vice versa.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"kam4085" <kmaclennan@...> wrote:
>
> Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
> heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
> know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
> Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any
I
> can get.
>
> Thanks
> Kersten
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
9
They do not at present have from 6 to 8, or 6 to 6 or 8 to 8.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Paul V. Blais" <pblais@...> wrote:
>
> If you go from 4-6 they do. Or at least they did.
>
>
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of peterlv2002
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 10:59 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
>
>
>
> Kersten,
> I would use progress. It is faster at this point. Epicor has made
> some great improvements in 8.03.400 for SQL, but is still not progress.
> Also, are you aware that Epicor does not have a tool to covert your
> database from progress to sql or vice versa.
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
> "kam4085" <kmaclennan@> wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone out there gone from Progress to SQL or visa versa? I had
> > heard that the system was never really optimized for SQL but I don't
> > know that for sure. I also heard that it is even slower than on
> > Progress. I'm just looking for some feedback and would appreciate any
> I
> > can get.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Kersten
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
10
Hi All
Â
Has anyone done a detailed time comparison for the performance of Epicor 9 on Progress vs SQL?
Â
We are currently on Progress and it is painfully slow most of the time.
Â
We have tried all of the 'tweaks' suggested and it doesnt seem to make any difference.
Â
The server doesnt seem to be under much/any strain most of the time - just Epicor seems to be written in a 'clunky' fashion.
Â
Also, has anyone on Progress or SQL put the DB side of things on a separate box instead of it all being on one server?
Â
How does it perform?
Â
What about virtual servers - any experiences? Good or bad?
Â
Thanks,
Â
Â
CHRIS

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
11
I currently have Epicor905 on separate box from the DB and running in virtual and it seems to run ok not anyhting super fast but I have yet to get in and start tweaking either for performance. So far the experience has been ok with virualizing them but we are still in the pilot part of our rollout.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Chris Thompson <chriselectrix@...> wrote:
>
> Hi All
> Â
> Has anyone done a detailed time comparison for the performance of Epicor 9 on Progress vs SQL?
> Â
> We are currently on Progress and it is painfully slow most of the time.
> Â
> We have tried all of the 'tweaks' suggested and it doesnt seem to make any difference.
> Â
> The server doesnt seem to be under much/any strain most of the time - just Epicor seems to be written in a 'clunky' fashion.
> Â
> Also, has anyone on Progress or SQL put the DB side of things on a separate box instead of it all being on one server?
> Â
> How does it perform?
> Â
> What about virtual servers - any experiences? Good or bad?
> Â
> Thanks,
> Â
> Â
> CHRIS
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
12
Could anyone comment on their experience with using progress vs SQL with Epicor 9.05? Performance, conversion, bugs, etc

Sent from my iPad
13
There are a TON of threads about this if you search the list history.

In a nutshell:
Progress is easier to install/administrate/upgrade.
SQL is easier to 'hack' in as much as it's easier to find people with SQL
skills.
SQL has a few more bugs, though it's not a dramatic increase and they
mostly deal with customization-oriented features.

If you need SQL, use it without reservation.
If you don't care beyond picking the 'right' one, go Progress.



*John Driggers*
*High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking*
*
**:: 904.404.9233*
*:: waffqle@...*
*:: NO FAXES*

*

*



On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Nancy Dornacker <
nancy.dornacker@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Could anyone comment on their experience with using progress vs SQL with
> Epicor 9.05? Performance, conversion, bugs, etc
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
14
It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
it's got to be bad!
15
While it can be surprising at first, SQL performance is usually just as
good, sometimes better.

In a SQL install the progress DB is only holding a copy of the schema. It's
never actually used to store data nor does data 'pass through' as is
sometimes heard.

Due to the abundance of tools and resources devoted to SQL performance (and
the sheer time and money MS has pumped into SQL), some of the fastest
system you'll see are running SQL.

OpenEdge is a development platform that comes with a DB as opposed to
primarily being a database. As such, it is written to be somewhat agnostic
regarding data sources.

While a SQL install is more complicated and requires a bit more
administration work; it really isn't the hack-job that it's
often perceived to be.

*
*
*John Driggers*
*High End Dev, System Design, Profit Drinking*
*
**:: 904.404.9233*
*:: waffqle@...*
*:: NO FAXES*

*

*



On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Simon Robinson <simon@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
> yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
> it's got to be bad!
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
16
I'm on Progress and came from a SQL environment. Everyone on this list who
knows me knows that I would prefer to have a daily root canal by a blind
one-handed dentist than live with Progress. The freedom and power you have
with SQL is unbelievable. And performance, on a well equipped box, is equal
if not better.. especially on large queries and reports as I strongly
believe SQL is just a better RDBMS overall and has so many tweaks to
increase performance vs Progress. I mean, with Progress: a Dump and Load,
really? What is this, COBOL? I would choose SQL 8 days of the week.



I know there are many folks on here who are pro-Progress and I guess if you
have limited IT resources and a small user base, then sure. go with
Progress. Heck, worst case, have an opensource db option. MySQL and
PostgreSQL are better options than Progress.



I do strongly believe (hope?) one day there will not be an option of
Progress and only SQL.



From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Simon Robinson
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:24 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL





It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
it's got to be bad!



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12




-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
17
Hey hey don't knock COBOL, it fed me for many a weeks LoL

*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
<http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
<http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Vic Drecchio
<vic.drecchio@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> I'm on Progress and came from a SQL environment. Everyone on this list who
> knows me knows that I would prefer to have a daily root canal by a blind
> one-handed dentist than live with Progress. The freedom and power you have
> with SQL is unbelievable. And performance, on a well equipped box, is equal
> if not better.. especially on large queries and reports as I strongly
> believe SQL is just a better RDBMS overall and has so many tweaks to
> increase performance vs Progress. I mean, with Progress: a Dump and Load,
> really? What is this, COBOL? I would choose SQL 8 days of the week.
>
> I know there are many folks on here who are pro-Progress and I guess if you
> have limited IT resources and a small user base, then sure. go with
> Progress. Heck, worst case, have an opensource db option. MySQL and
> PostgreSQL are better options than Progress.
>
> I do strongly believe (hope?) one day there will not be an option of
> Progress and only SQL.
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of
> Simon Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:24 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
>
>
> It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
> yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
> it's got to be bad!
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
18
You're not old enough for COBOL! :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Jose Gomez
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 9:58 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL

Hey hey don't knock COBOL, it fed me for many a weeks LoL

*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
<http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
<http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Vic Drecchio
<vic.drecchio@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> I'm on Progress and came from a SQL environment. Everyone on this list
> who knows me knows that I would prefer to have a daily root canal by a
> blind one-handed dentist than live with Progress. The freedom and
> power you have with SQL is unbelievable. And performance, on a well
> equipped box, is equal if not better.. especially on large queries and
> reports as I strongly believe SQL is just a better RDBMS overall and
> has so many tweaks to increase performance vs Progress. I mean, with
> Progress: a Dump and Load, really? What is this, COBOL? I would choose SQL
8 days of the week.
>
> I know there are many folks on here who are pro-Progress and I guess
> if you have limited IT resources and a small user base, then sure. go
> with Progress. Heck, worst case, have an opensource db option. MySQL
> and PostgreSQL are better options than Progress.
>
> I do strongly believe (hope?) one day there will not be an option of
> Progress and only SQL.
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Simon Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:24 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
>
>
> It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
> yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
> it's got to be bad!
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date:
> 06/13/12
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date:
> 06/13/12
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have
already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links





-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5069 - Release Date: 06/14/12



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5069 - Release Date: 06/14/12
19
It fed me for many a year when the IBM360 was King and running a production job meant mounting 1600bpi mag tapes. -Karl



________________________________
From: Jose Gomez <jose@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL

Hey hey don't knock COBOL, it fed me for many a weeks LoL

*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez>Â <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
 <http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
 <http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
 <http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Vic Drecchio
<vic.drecchio@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> I'm on Progress and came from a SQL environment. Everyone on this list who
> knows me knows that I would prefer to have a daily root canal by a blind
> one-handed dentist than live with Progress. The freedom and power you have
> with SQL is unbelievable. And performance, on a well equipped box, is equal
> if not better.. especially on large queries and reports as I strongly
> believe SQL is just a better RDBMS overall and has so many tweaks to
> increase performance vs Progress. I mean, with Progress: a Dump and Load,
> really? What is this, COBOL? I would choose SQL 8 days of the week.
>
> I know there are many folks on here who are pro-Progress and I guess if you
> have limited IT resources and a small user base, then sure. go with
> Progress. Heck, worst case, have an opensource db option. MySQL and
> PostgreSQL are better options than Progress.
>
> I do strongly believe (hope?) one day there will not be an option of
> Progress and only SQL.
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of
> Simon Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:24 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
>
>
> It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
> yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
> it's got to be bad!
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>Â
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note:Â You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.%c2%a0
(2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20
You would think so, but I've done my fair bit of COBOL, Circa 2006, I keep
bits of it around do remind me of the torture do enjoy :-)

*****************************************************************
* NAME:4000-PROCESS-RECORD *
* FUNCTION: OPEN AND CLOSE TRANSACTION FILE, WRITE ALL RECORDS *
* CALLED BY: 0000-MAIN
* AUTHOR: JOSE GOMEZ 1/2006
*
*****************************************************************
4000-PROCESS-RECORD.
MOVE "F" TO EOF
MOVE SPACES TO RPT-UNDERLINE
OPEN OUTPUT TRANSACOUT INPUT TRANSACIN
PERFORM UNTIL EOF = "T"
READ TRANSACIN RECORD INTO OUT-REC
AT END
MOVE "T" TO EOF
NOT AT END
ADD 1 TO RECORDS-READ
PERFORM 4100-CHECK-RECORD
IF RPT-UNDERLINE = SPACES
ADD 1 TO RECORDS-VALID
WRITE PRINT-REC FROM OUT-REC
MOVE SPACES TO RPT-UNDERLINE

ELSE
ADD 1 TO RECORDS-ERROR
MOVE IN-T-CODE TO RPT-T-CODE
MOVE IN-T-INVOICE TO RPT-INVOICE
MOVE IN-T-AMOUNTS TO RPT-AMOUNT
MOVE IN-T-PATIENT-NUM TO RPT-PATIENT
MOVE IN-T-DR-CODE TO RPT-DR-CODE
MOVE IN-T-DATE TO RPT-DATE
IF U-PATIENT-NAME = SPACES
MOVE SPACES TO RPT-PATIENT-NAME
STRING T-P-LNAME (INDX) DELIMITED BY SPACES
", " DELIMITED BY SIZE
T-P-FNAME (INDX) DELIMITED BY SPACES
INTO RPT-PATIENT-NAME
ELSE
MOVE "NOT FOUND" TO RPT-PATIENT-NAME
END-IF
IF U-DR-CODE = SPACES
MOVE T-DR-NAME (INDX1) TO RPT-DR-NAME
ELSE
MOVE "NOT FOUND" TO RPT-DR-NAME

END-IF

ADD 1 TO LINE-COUNT
PERFORM 9999-PAGE-BREAK
WRITE PRINT-RPT
FROM RPT-VALIDATION
AFTER ADVANCING 1 LINES
WRITE PRINT-RPT
FROM RPT-UNDERLINE
AFTER ADVANCING 0 LINES
MOVE SPACES TO RPT-UNDERLINE
END-IF



END-READ
END-PERFORM
CLOSE TRANSACIN TRANSACOUT.


*Jose C Gomez*
*Software Engineer*
*
*
*checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
*
*T: 904.469.1524 mobile
E: jose@...
http://www.josecgomez.com
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
<http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
<http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
<http://www.usdoingstuff.com>

*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*



On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Karl Dash <dashkarl@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> It fed me for many a year when the IBM360 was King and running a
> production job meant mounting 1600bpi mag tapes. -Karl
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jose Gomez <jose@...>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 6:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
>
>
> Hey hey don't knock COBOL, it fed me for many a weeks LoL
>
> *Jose C Gomez*
> *Software Engineer*
> *
> *
> *checkout my new blog <http://www.usdoingstuff.com> *
> *
> *T: 904.469.1524 mobile
> E: jose@...
> http://www.josecgomez.com
>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/josecgomez> <
> http://www.facebook.com/josegomez>
> <http://www.google.com/profiles/jose.gomez> <
> http://www.twitter.com/joc85>
> <http://www.josecgomez.com/professional-resume/>
> <http://www.josecgomez.com/feed/>
> <http://www.usdoingstuff.com>
>
> *Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?*
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Vic Drecchio
> <vic.drecchio@...>wrote:
>
> > **
>
> >
> >
> > I'm on Progress and came from a SQL environment. Everyone on this list
> who
> > knows me knows that I would prefer to have a daily root canal by a blind
> > one-handed dentist than live with Progress. The freedom and power you
> have
> > with SQL is unbelievable. And performance, on a well equipped box, is
> equal
> > if not better.. especially on large queries and reports as I strongly
> > believe SQL is just a better RDBMS overall and has so many tweaks to
> > increase performance vs Progress. I mean, with Progress: a Dump and Load,
> > really? What is this, COBOL? I would choose SQL 8 days of the week.
> >
> > I know there are many folks on here who are pro-Progress and I guess if
> you
> > have limited IT resources and a small user base, then sure. go with
> > Progress. Heck, worst case, have an opensource db option. MySQL and
> > PostgreSQL are better options than Progress.
> >
> > I do strongly believe (hope?) one day there will not be an option of
> > Progress and only SQL.
> >
> > From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of
> > Simon Robinson
> > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:24 AM
> > To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Vantage] Re: Progress vs SQL
> >
> >
> > It's not Progress vs SQL it's Progress only vs Progress and SQL! We've
> > yet to go live with our Progress and SQL version but performance wise
> > it's got to be bad!
> >
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2012.0.2180 / Virus Database: 2433/5068 - Release Date: 06/13/12
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and
> Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]