Micha Bieber wrote:
Thursday, May 18, 2006, 17:36:53, Jay Sprenkle wrote:
Since you pass that in to begin with, why do you need the database
to provide information you already have?
Thats by design (tm), but it might be not the best one. For performance reasons
I have splitted my project in a way, requiring 2 database files.
The first one holding all sort of tricky information. This database is
pretty small. The second one holds somewhat bulky amounts of data.
Several millions of rows distributed in 200 tables.
I have to care for everything I do with this db. So also deleting the
poor thing is at times the best solution todo anything in time.
Of course both tables are logically intertwined and I have all sorts of
different requirements - open/creating/updating the one, but not the other, etc.
Attaching the big one to the small table. At different times not only
during creation.
For this, it helps to link the file name of one of the databases as a
special table entry into the other. To do so, it would be nice to have
access to the file name at random times.
Micha
In that case make your DB context a structure which holds the pointer to
the open db structure and the file or path name, plus any other
attributes you may want to access similarly.
It is not a smart technique to assume that you can access underlying
data structures and expect them to remain identically placed between
releases.
