I've used base ever since it was first offered. About 6 months ago a
Java update (I'm running Ubuntu 11.04) slowed it down to a pathetic
speed. The latest Java update didn't really help much. I was hoping it
would be fixed that update, or that the LibreOffice folks would find a
solution
On 07
On 07/27/2011 05:03 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
Le 27/07/11 10:16, Tom Cloyd a écrit :
Hi Tom,
Just to move the record pointer from the first to the last record takes
almost exactly 20 seconds. To do a search of the beginning of the main
text field for a 6 character string that isn't there
Don,
So, for 6 months, OO (I presume) and now LO (is it that old?) have been
promoting a db which doesn't work. I have over 10 full time days
invested in this, and I'm watching it fall apart in front of me,
apparently irretrievably. I understand LO has NO programmer working on
BASE, and with
Hello,
I have been using OpenOffice and now LibreOffice with BASE for a long
time. My MySQL database "serves" a windband and all the issues related
to such an animal (eg. repertoire, uniforms, members, contacts, concert
programmes, etc., etc.).
Of course my tables are small compared to what I used
users@global.libreoffice.org; Tom Cloyd
Sent: Wed, 27 July, 2011 17:53:40
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hello,
I have been using OpenOffice and now LibreOffice with BASE for a long
time. My MySQL database "serves" a windband and all the issues related
to suc
Thanks, Andreas.
To summarize what I learned from that second link: I need to install
sun-java6-jre_6.22-0ubuntu1~10.04 into a directory of my choosing, then
direct LO to use this special older version (which, it is reported, does
not cause the awful slowdown we're experiencing).
Look like a
An obvious alternative, as well: move data tables to a non-java db, and
use LO as front end for that - sqlite might be a reasonable first choice.
t.
On 07/27/2011 04:19 PM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
Thanks, Andreas.
To summarize what I learned from that second link: I need to install
sun-java6-jre_6.
On 28/07/11 02:30, Tom Cloyd wrote:
1. Are there any alternative graphic interface tools that even
approximate Base's functionality (other than Access)? The last time I
looked - a number of weeks ago, I didn't come up with any equivalents.
Tom,
The GUI is one element but how do you want too ac
Hi Tom,
Just my - maybe naive - 2 pennies worth of comments:
As I mentioned before, I have been using OO/LO for years together with
BASE with MySQL (which - also "sigh") now "belongs" to Oracle as well.
As a connector to the DB I have tried out the Java version (always had
trouble with it one way
On 07/27/2011 04:18 PM, Andreas Säger wrote:
Am 28.07.2011 00:00, Tom Cloyd wrote:
This is do not understand. I thought HYPERSQL was the default db engine.
You say you're using it to server ANOTHER db? why not access that
directly through Base? Am I misunderstanding something (entirely
possible
On 07/28/2011 12:44 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
Le 27/07/11 18:14, Tom Cloyd a écrit :
That command appears to have cut 5 seconds off the record pointer move
test, and also off the full db search test I ran previously.
Well better than nothing I suppose, but I do sympathise. Did the JDK/JR
, On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
On 07/28/2011 12:44 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
Le 27/07/11 18:14, Tom Cloyd a écrit :
That command appears to have cut 5 seconds off the record pointer move
test, and also off the full db search test I ran previously.
Well better than nothing I
From: Tom Cloyd
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 9:04:22
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
, On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
> On 07/28/2011 12:44 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
&g
Hallo Andreas,
In my view, BASE "falling apart" would mean LO's "death sentence" in the long
run! Anybody in even the simplest business environment will want to write
documents based on data stored in business-critical databases (and I think I
am right in assumung that relational DBs have been the
:)
From: Heinrich Stoellinger
To: users@global.libreoffice.org; Tom Cloyd
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 7:15:31
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi Tom,
Just my - maybe naive - 2 pennies worth of comments:
As I mentioned before, I have been using OO/LO for years
inger
To: users@global.libreoffice.org; Tom Cloyd
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 7:15:31
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi Tom,
Just my - maybe naive - 2 pennies worth of comments:
As I mentioned before, I have been using OO/LO for years together with
BASE
u, 28 July, 2011 7:15:31
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi Tom,
Just my - maybe naive - 2 pennies worth of comments:
As I mentioned before, I have been using OO/LO for years together with
BASE with MySQL (which - also "sigh") now "belongs
Hi Tom,
When the first problems showed up for me about 6 months ago, it was
recommended to go back to the Java 1.6.0.22 from 1.6.0.24. I have my
database on 4 computers, and could never make things work with getting a
previous version installed, so I gave up and just tolerated the
situation.
Heinz,
I completely agree. LO without a function Base won't fly. Either TDF
recognizes this - by DOING something - or we have our answer.
Tom
On 07/28/2011 05:08 AM, Heinrich Stoellinger wrote:
Hallo Andreas,
In my view, BASE "falling apart" would mean LO's "death sentence" in
the long
run
Hi Don,
In my view LO/OO do NOT require Java, neither on Linux nor on Windows.
As I posted earlier, I have been using ODBC for both the Windows and
Linux versions. It works o.k., even though I still hope that the native
MySQL-supplied connector will function correctly under 3.4.2.
Regards
H
On Th
Don,
Seems like a reasonable request to me, and I'll up the ante.
Where the &^%$ is the management - The Document Foundation - in all
this, right now, today? Do they even watch this list? In short, do they
give a damn that the only theoretically viable alternative to Access
(for ordinary user
to us to work out what we need and from who and go get it.
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Tom Cloyd
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 17:06:15
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Heinz,
I completely agree. L
Has anybody suggested that this command should an option when saving
when ever records are deleted?
On 7/27/2011 12:14 PM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
SHUTDOWN COMPACT
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how
Hi,
Different ones of us have tried this. It is a Java issue. I keep my
database compacted on a regular basis. Thank you for trying to be of
assistance.
Don
On 07/28/2011 12:45 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote:
Has anybody suggested that this command should an option when saving
when ever records
Tom Cloyd wrote:
< much clipped to save space >
2. If LO's in trouble with the current sun-Java, so's OO. Where's Apache
in this situation? Again, where's *TDF*? Why aren't they and Apache
working together on this? Looks rather like a leadership problem, to me.
Tom, the other points I can n
Hi,
Le 28/07/2011 18:10, Heinrich Stoellinger a écrit :
In my view LO/OO do NOT require Java, neither on Linux nor on Windows.
AFAIK, LO/OOo currently *DO* require Java for Base to simply work. TDF
have announced they would get rid of the java-isms in the code. This
implies a major rewrite o
Hi Tom,
Thank you for your great ideas and suggestions.
Starting with Java 1.6.0_24, this problem arose with both OpenOffice
Base and LibreOffice Base. The problems were documented on an OpenOffice
forum that I searched when the problem first arose. Another alternative
would be for LibreOffic
eoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 17:06:15
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Heinz,
I completely agree. LO without a function Base won't fly. Either TDF recognizes
this - by DOING something - or we have our answer.
Tom
On 07/28/2011 05:08 AM, Heinric
__
From: Tom Cloyd
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 18:16:57
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
I'm up for it! (Love that quote!)
Maybe leaking this issue to the press would get some attention??
Tom C.
On 07/28/2011 1
is Base and
pleased to join in and fix it.
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Tom Cloyd
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 18:16:57
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
I'm up for it! (Love that quote!
to manage a drive forwards for Base. We need
to manage this not sit&wait.
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Andy Brown
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 17:57:32
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
gs as duplicates quite quickly when they
are on a roll.
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Paul D. Mirowsky
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 17:45:05
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Has anybody suggested
Heinrich,
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:15 +0200, Heinrich Stoellinger wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> Just my - maybe naive - 2 pennies worth of comments:
> As I mentioned before, I have been using OO/LO for years together with
> BASE with MySQL (which - also "sigh") now "belongs" to Oracle as well.
> As a conne
Hi Tom,
Tom Cloyd wrote (28-07-11 18:06)
I completely agree. LO without a function Base won't fly. Either TDF
recognizes this - by DOING something - or we have our answer.
Well, the challenges with base are known. This does not mean that there
is an instant solution. However the fast growing
From: Cor Nouws
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 20:47:59
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi Tom,
Tom Cloyd wrote (28-07-11 18:06)
> I completely agree. LO without a function Base won&#x
Hi :)
Could that community be prevailed upon to join TDF and manage the Base part of
the project? Presumably they have knowledge of key players and have a good
idea
of what needs to be done to improve Base?
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Andreas Säger
To: users@
Hi All,
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 10:27 +0100, Tom Davies wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cor Nouws
> To: users@global.libreoffice.org
> Sent: Thu, 28 July, 2011 20:47:59
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably
Hi
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 17:55 -0700, ponsiarceds wrote:
> .
> tomcloyd wrote:
> >
> > , On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
> >
> > Ug. This is getting ugly really fast. I'm really not on home ground
> > here at all.
> >
>
> FWIW, here is a relatively painless way to install an older
Hi
Thanks you for this tips and to all for Base and data bases tips !
Regards,
Jorge Rodríguez
El vie, 29-07-2011 a las 17:55 -0700, ponsiarceds escribió:
> .
> tomcloyd wrote:
> >
> > , On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
> >
> > Ug. This is getting ugly really
I'll chime in - thanks indeed. I just removed my current sun-java, and
installed
sun-java6-bin_6.22-0ubuntu1~10.04_i386.deb and
sun-java6-jre_6.22-0ubuntu1~10.04_all.deb
Everything seems to run fine. However, the increase in Base/HYPERSQL
speed is only about 25%. Disappointing. This still i
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
> I think it's more a case of working on several fronts within TDF.
> 1. joining the Steering-Discuss mailing list and promoting the cause there.
Tom's right. I can definitely recommend taking time out to join the
SC's twice-weekly call co
ibreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi
On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 17:55 -0700, ponsiarceds wrote:
> .
> tomcloyd wrote:
> >
> > , On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
> >
> > Ug. This is getting ugly really fast. I'm really not on home ground
Magnificent!!! Thank you, ponsiarceds! I followed your
instructions for having an older version of Java along side the present
one. I'm running Ubuntu 11.04 with the LibreOffice version of 3.4.1. Now
base works really fast like it always did. Then only thing I did
differently wa
I may have seen this too late to join in, but I'll make the next one for
sure. Thanks very much for the tip.
I agree with Tom, too, in theory. The problem is that my resource
account is already overdrawn. I have nothing left with which to make a
heavy investment, anywhere. If it's just a matte
One thing to be careful of. You can use either the jre or the jdk. The
jdk is basically for developers and not needed by most folks. Make sure
when you follow the instructions below you use one or the other.
On 07/29/2011 08:55 PM, ponsiarceds wrote:
.
tomcloyd wrote:
, On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM
Le 29/07/2011 10:41, Andreas Säger a écrit :
As a matter of fact you can disable/remove Java, hit F4 ... connect,
query, edit and dump.
If I would convert our Java databases and remove Java from our systems
nobody would notice the change.
Could you elaborate, please?
If I remove Java, can I o
Hi :)
The main thing is that you found a way to solve your current problem.
Congrats and regards from
Tom :)
From: Tom Cloyd
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Sat, 30 July, 2011 18:51:02
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access
On 07/29/2011 06:55 PM, ponsiarceds wrote:
.
tomcloyd wrote:
, On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
Ug. This is getting ugly really fast. I'm really not on home ground
here at all.
FWIW, here is a relatively painless way to install an older JRE along side
the default Ubuntu one.
( I'm usi
Hi :)
It might be time to cut Base loose. Most versions of MS Office don't include
Access. Gnome Office doesn't have a database program. Perhaps Office Suites
just don't need an integrated program to do this sort of stuff. Maybe Calc is
enough. There are a few alternatives on the market fo
What I like about this idea is that it frees it up to be picked up by
anyone who wants to take it and run with it, and THAT just might work.
I do fear for what it might do with people who need an integrated solution.
t.
~~
Tom Cloyd / t...@tomcloyd.com /
Sent: Sun, 31 July, 2011 1:40:19
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
On 07/29/2011 06:55 PM, ponsiarceds wrote:
> .
> tomcloyd wrote:
>> , On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote:
>>
>> Ug. This is getting ugly really fast. I'm r
-Исходное сообщение-
From: Tom Cloyd
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2011 4:40 AM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
On 07/29/2011 06:55 PM, ponsiarceds wrote:
.
tomcloyd wrote:
, On 07/28/2011 12:53 AM, Tom Cloyd wrote
My first database was a dos version. I then moved to Microsoft Office
and bought Access to add to it. After a few years I got tired of paying
Microsoft prices and got Word Perfect Office Pro which included Paradox.
It worked very well. Once Open Office came out, I figured that would
ultimately
Hi Tom,
Tom Davies schrieb:
Hi :)
It might be time to cut Base loose. Most versions of MS Office don't include
Access. Gnome Office doesn't have a database program. Perhaps Office Suites
just don't need an integrated program to do this sort of stuff. Maybe Calc is
enough. There are a few a
Hi All
I have contacted someone I know who is on the Steering Committee, and is
a Founding Member, of 'The Document Foundation' and he has replied to me
asking for the full details. He is not involved on the Base side of the
project himself but I have asked him to pass the information on to th
gr8.base users might feel betrayed now if base support is discontinued.that
will not be a good experience for them.though personally i do not use base
myself.
best wishes
On 31 July 2011 16:19, Ian Whitfield wrote:
> Hi All
>
> I have contacted someone I know who is on the Steering Committee, an
Hello,
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
A
On 07/31/2011 04:49 AM, Ian Whitfield wrote:
Hi All
I have contacted someone I know who is on the Steering Committee, and
is a Founding Member, of 'The Document Foundation' and he has replied
to me asking for the full details. He is not involved on the Base side
of the project himself but I h
On 30/07/2011 19:37, Don C. Myers wrote:
Magnificent!!! Thank you, ponsiarceds! I followed your
instructions for having an older version of Java along side the
present one. I'm running Ubuntu 11.04 with the LibreOffice version of
3.4.1. Now base works really fast like it always
Hi Ian,
For some reason not all of the previous text I was responding to showed
up in that post. This information I used was from a post from
ponsiarceds. I'll paste everything below. Just make sure you are
consistent with either jre or jdk in the instructions. The instructions
have the two m
Some clarification:
The JRE is sufficient (and smaller) if you just want to USE Base.
I will absolutely attest to 1.6.0_21's being an order of magnatude
faster than BOTH ...0_26 AND ...0_22, for me. The difference is very
dramatic. Since running with ...0_21 my Base applications are simply
ex
Hi Tom,
I just tried 1.6.0_21 on my main work computer. I can tell very little
difference. I will try it on my slowest computer at home tonight. When
1.6.0_22 was the one used in Ubuntu, my Base was fast. I have over 2600
records in it. If I went from the first record to the last, it was
almo
Ian,
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 17:36 +0200, Ian Whitfield wrote:
> On 30/07/2011 19:37, Don C. Myers wrote:
> > Magnificent!!! Thank you, ponsiarceds! I followed your
> > instructions for having an older version of Java along side the
> > present one. I'm running Ubuntu 11.04 with
Hi Tom,
I installed 1.6.0_21 on my home computer last night and compared it to
1.6.0_22. This is a 5 year old laptop with an AMD T-50 processor and 2
gigs of ram. It is far from a powerhouse, but it works very will with
Ubuntu. Both versions of Java work very well with Base. 1.6.0_21 is a
sec
Ian,
On behalf of all Base users, thanks for trying! As you infer, it would have
been encouraging to receive a more pro-active reply, especially from a Founder
of TDF (and long-time ex-oOo active member). Perhaps it's difficult for him to
say much else, if there are very few Base Developers.
Ian, thank you from me also. When I see the number of people asking
questions about Base on this forum it seems there is a lot of interest
in having a database. So far the side by side install of the second,
older version of Java has been working very well for me.
On 08/05/2011 11:01 AM, Tony
Hi Tom,
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 18:07 +0100, Tom Davies wrote:
> We need to attract some devs to this project. Preferably paid devs because
> there is a bit of a quagmire trying to work out which patches have which
> licences and so which cannot be incorporated into the LGPL and which can.
On 07/27/2011 11:44 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 18:07 +0100, Tom Davies wrote:
We need to attract some devs to this project. Preferably paid devs because
there is a bit of a quagmire trying to work out which patches have which
licences and so which cannot be incorpor
68 matches
Mail list logo
