Обсуждение: Implementation Suggestions
Hi, I'm wanting to build a database and interface for a small business to keep track of things such as clients, suppliers etc. The database will be served on a Linux box, with users accessing/updating it over the network from both Linux and windows. I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP would be the fastest way of going about it. I have a understanding of SQL and can program but I don't want to spend an eternity working on it and maintaining it. Thank you -- Rory Hart Lifestyle Management Consultant Professional Lifestyle Management http://www.lifestylemanage.com Phone 03 9879 5643 PO Box 4179 Fax 03 9879 6743 Ringwood Vic 3134 Mobile 0412 821030 Australia
Rory Hart wrote: > Hi, > > I'm wanting to build a database and interface for a small business to > keep track of things such as clients, suppliers etc. The database will > be served on a Linux box, with users accessing/updating it over the > network from both Linux and windows. > > I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement this > quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP would be > the fastest way of going about it. A web interface will make it easy for others to use (and from anywhere). OTOH, if you're comfortable with C# or Java or "X" you could do it that way, however that will mean either installing an app or applet on each PC. > I have a understanding of SQL and can program but I don't want to spend > an eternity working on it and maintaining it. What languages are you comfortable with? PHP, Ruby, Python, Perl all work well for web interfaces. C#, Java (and others) work fine as client apps.. -- Postgresql & php tutorials http://www.designmagick.com/
Chris wrote: > Rory Hart wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm wanting to build a database and interface for a small business to >> keep track of things such as clients, suppliers etc. The database >> will be served on a Linux box, with users accessing/updating it over >> the network from both Linux and windows. >> >> I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement >> this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP >> would be the fastest way of going about it. > > > A web interface will make it easy for others to use (and from > anywhere). OTOH, if you're comfortable with C# or Java or "X" you > could do it that way, however that will mean either installing an app > or applet on each PC. > >> I have a understanding of SQL and can program but I don't want to >> spend an eternity working on it and maintaining it. > > > What languages are you comfortable with? PHP, Ruby, Python, Perl all > work well for web interfaces. C#, Java (and others) work fine as > client apps.. > PHP would be my choice i think, there are libraries and tools for using pgsql and php aren't there? -- Rory Hart Lifestyle Management Consultant Professional Lifestyle Management http://www.lifestylemanage.com Phone 03 9879 5643 PO Box 4179 Fax 03 9879 6743 Ringwood Vic 3134 Mobile 0412 821030 Australia
Rory Hart wrote: > Chris wrote: > >> Rory Hart wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm wanting to build a database and interface for a small business to >>> keep track of things such as clients, suppliers etc. The database >>> will be served on a Linux box, with users accessing/updating it over >>> the network from both Linux and windows. >>> >>> I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement >>> this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP >>> would be the fastest way of going about it. >> >> >> >> A web interface will make it easy for others to use (and from >> anywhere). OTOH, if you're comfortable with C# or Java or "X" you >> could do it that way, however that will mean either installing an app >> or applet on each PC. >> >>> I have a understanding of SQL and can program but I don't want to >>> spend an eternity working on it and maintaining it. >> >> >> >> What languages are you comfortable with? PHP, Ruby, Python, Perl all >> work well for web interfaces. C#, Java (and others) work fine as >> client apps.. >> > PHP would be my choice i think, there are libraries and tools for using > pgsql and php aren't there? > Of course. Shameless plug coming up ;) http://www.designmagick.com/category/2/Starting-Out -- Postgresql & php tutorials http://www.designmagick.com/
Chris wrote: > > Of course. Shameless plug coming up ;) > > http://www.designmagick.com/category/2/Starting-Out > Thanks ^_^ -- Rory Hart Lifestyle Management Consultant Professional Lifestyle Management http://www.lifestylemanage.com Phone 03 9879 5643 PO Box 4179 Fax 03 9879 6743 Ringwood Vic 3134 Mobile 0412 821030 Australia
> >> I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement > >> this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP > >> would be the fastest way of going about it. > > If you used Ruby on Rails, you'd be finished by now. It slices, it dices, it makes julienne fries. Seriously, it's not too bad if you don't mind it's plentiful shortcomings. I was getting carpal tunnel syndrome from typing <scripting language> pages so I switched to RoR for a hobby app. It works fine, but you have to do it "The Rails Way" and expect no help from the "Community" because they are a fanboi cheerleader squad, not interested in silly stuff like referential integrity, functions, triggers, etc. All that nonsense belongs in the application! Check this out, there is no stale connection detection or handling in rails. I'm not kidding. If you connection drops out, restart your web server. Sorry. Blah. Anyway, besides its warts, it is dead easy to use, and does make putting together web applications in a "green field" scenario quite painless. Just don't try to do anything outside the box like trying to access an existing database that uses RDBMS features heavily and uses normal object naming. - Ian
Ian Harding wrote:
I am fascinated by your post. I have never heard a bad thing said about RoR.
I have been meaning to investigate it because it is the only system I've heard of that makes the same claim that I do, which is to have eliminated entire categories of labor through automation.
Except that I built mine on a database foundation. Systematize and automate database handling and UI creation should follow. I did not know that RoR was so cavalier w/respect to the database, is that really true? Is it really just yet-another-UI system?
IMHO the problem with all blink-of-an-eye dev tools is that they are not built on a foundation of solid database design, but now we're drifting OT....
I am fascinated by your post. I have never heard a bad thing said about RoR.
I have been meaning to investigate it because it is the only system I've heard of that makes the same claim that I do, which is to have eliminated entire categories of labor through automation.
Except that I built mine on a database foundation. Systematize and automate database handling and UI creation should follow. I did not know that RoR was so cavalier w/respect to the database, is that really true? Is it really just yet-another-UI system?
IMHO the problem with all blink-of-an-eye dev tools is that they are not built on a foundation of solid database design, but now we're drifting OT....
I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP would be the fastest way of going about it.If you used Ruby on Rails, you'd be finished by now. It slices, it dices, it makes julienne fries. Seriously, it's not too bad if you don't mind it's plentiful shortcomings. I was getting carpal tunnel syndrome from typing <scripting language> pages so I switched to RoR for a hobby app. It works fine, but you have to do it "The Rails Way" and expect no help from the "Community" because they are a fanboi cheerleader squad, not interested in silly stuff like referential integrity, functions, triggers, etc. All that nonsense belongs in the application! Check this out, there is no stale connection detection or handling in rails. I'm not kidding. If you connection drops out, restart your web server. Sorry. Blah. Anyway, besides its warts, it is dead easy to use, and does make putting together web applications in a "green field" scenario quite painless. Just don't try to do anything outside the box like trying to access an existing database that uses RDBMS features heavily and uses normal object naming. - Ian ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Вложения
On 3/29/06, Ian Harding <iharding@destinydata.com> wrote:
That's an eye opener, thanks Ian.
t.n.a.
Seriously, it's not too bad if you don't mind it's plentiful
shortcomings. I was getting carpal tunnel syndrome from typing
<scripting language> pages so I switched to RoR for a hobby app. It
works fine, but you have to do it "The Rails Way" and expect no help
from the "Community" because they are a fanboi cheerleader squad, not
interested in silly stuff like referential integrity, functions,
triggers, etc. All that nonsense belongs in the application!
...
That's an eye opener, thanks Ian.
t.n.a.
Kenneth Downs wrote: > I have been meaning to investigate it because it is the only system I've > heard of that makes the same claim that I do, which is to have > eliminated entire categories of labor through automation. Have you looked at http://catalyst.perl.org/ lately? IMHO it's "Rails done right" and it's perl, so it just /has/ to be good ;-) sorry, couldn't resist. bkw
On Mar 29, 2006, at 8:03 AM, Kenneth Downs wrote: > Ian Harding wrote: > > I am fascinated by your post. I have never heard a bad thing said > about RoR. > > I have been meaning to investigate it because it is the only system > I've heard of that makes the same claim that I do, which is to have > eliminated entire categories of labor through automation. > > Except that I built mine on a database foundation. Systematize and > automate database handling and UI creation should follow. I did > not know that RoR was so cavalier w/respect to the database, is > that really true? Is it really just yet-another-UI system? Pretty much, AFAICT, it's designed to run with anything that supports SQL as it's embedded store, rather than allowing you to talk to an RDBMS with an existing schema easily. It's the exact opposite there of OpenACS, which puts tentacles deep into the database, and really relies on embedded functions and well crafted SQL. And only supports Oracle and PostgreSQL, not MySQL. I'm playing with Perl+Catalyst+DBIx at the moment, which seems to be a reasonable compromise, as long as you really like perl. :). For the original poster - a web interface might well be the simplest to put together, but if a client turns out to be a better solution I'd strongly suggest looking at Qt. It has nice SQL support and it's very quick to turn around a simple database access application, if you've a passing acquaintance with C++. And it'll compile to Windows, Linux and OS X from the same source. Cheers, Steve
On Mar 29, 2006, at 11:03 AM, Kenneth Downs wrote: > I am fascinated by your post. I have never heard a bad thing said > about RoR. Most of what you read about RoR is written from a very superficial view of what it promises, as tainted by the simplistic uses of mysql people are familiar with. Last summer at the O'Reilly OSCON, the author of RoR gave a presentation. My colleagues and I just sat there stunned at how one of the great features of RoR he was showing off was basically referential integrity. Except that you were *only* allowed to access the DB using the RoR tools. No direct connections were ever allowed. He brushed off any comments about that as "I consider the DB to be just a dumb object store". So why bother using an SQL engine then? Silly. That was the end of us even bothering to investigate it as a serious platform, though we have borrowed some of the ideas and concepts in our own in-house platform we have built since then. My take on RoR is that it makes the simple things simpler (kind of how the Daily Show is now Dailier) and the moderate to hard things impossible. If you have a simple project then by all means use it to full advantage. But if you have complex data models then fugeddaboutit. :-(
On Mar 29, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Steve Atkins wrote: > For the original poster - a web interface might well be the > simplest to put together, > but if a client turns out to be a better solution I'd strongly > suggest looking at Qt. > It has nice SQL support and it's very quick to turn around a simple > database There's also XUL built into Mozilla derived browsers if you want a middle-ground to full custom app and web app.
Ian Harding wrote: > ... > works fine, but you have to do it "The Rails Way" and expect no help > from the "Community" because they are a fanboi cheerleader squad, not > interested in silly stuff like referential integrity, functions, > triggers, etc. All that nonsense belongs in the application! You exaggerate. There's nothing that says you need to only use ActiveRecord's out-of-the-box configuration with rails apps. All of our models directly use their postgresql library which is just a wrapper around libpq; and from there you can use whatever postgresql specific tricks you'd like (postgis types was the main reason we used that instead of ActiveRecord). > Check this out, there is no stale connection detection or handling in > rails. I'm not kidding. If you connection drops out, restart your > web server. Sorry. Blah. Which is a reasonable default. If you want to catch the exception and re-set the connection, you surely can do so. We prefer to catch the exception and make the machine take itself out of the load-balancing pool so we can diagnose the problem rather than trying to automatically do (whatever it is you expected it to do). We're drifting way off topic so I'll stop here. I'd be happy to discuss further via email or on the rails lists.
Bernhard Weisshuhn wrote: > Kenneth Downs wrote: > >> I have been meaning to investigate it because it is the only system >> I've heard of that makes the same claim that I do, which is to have >> eliminated entire categories of labor through automation. > > > Have you looked at http://catalyst.perl.org/ lately? > IMHO it's "Rails done right" and it's perl, so it just /has/ to be > good ;-) > > sorry, couldn't resist. > bkw > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org Just had a look and it seems rather interesting! I had a soft spot for perl since it was my first "proper" programing language (I learnt pascal when I was 8 but never did anything more than four or five part pick a path adventures ^_^). Thanks -- Rory Hart Lifestyle Management Consultant Professional Lifestyle Management http://www.lifestylemanage.com Phone 03 9879 5643 PO Box 4179 Fax 03 9879 6743 Ringwood Vic 3134 Mobile 0412 821030 Australia
Thanks for all the suggestions I now have a lot better idea of my options. It is nice to fire off a question at a mailing list and get so many positive helpful answers, gives me a warm and fuzzy glow. Thank you all -- Rory Hart Lifestyle Management Consultant Professional Lifestyle Management http://www.lifestylemanage.com Phone 03 9879 5643 PO Box 4179 Fax 03 9879 6743 Ringwood Vic 3134 Mobile 0412 821030 Australia
Ian Harding wrote: >>>> I'm wondering if I could get some suggestions as to how implement >>>> this quickly and simply? I was thinking a web interface using PHP >>>> would be the fastest way of going about it. >>>> > > If you used Ruby on Rails, you'd be finished by now. It slices, it > dices, it makes julienne fries. > > Seriously, it's not too bad if you don't mind it's plentiful > shortcomings. I was getting carpal tunnel syndrome from typing > <scripting language> pages so I switched to RoR for a hobby app. It > works fine, but you have to do it "The Rails Way" and expect no help > from the "Community" because they are a fanboi cheerleader squad, not > interested in silly stuff like referential integrity, functions, > triggers, etc. All that nonsense belongs in the application! > > Check this out, there is no stale connection detection or handling in > rails. I'm not kidding. If you connection drops out, restart your > web server. Sorry. Blah. > > Anyway, besides its warts, it is dead easy to use, and does make > putting together web applications in a "green field" scenario quite > painless. Just don't try to do anything outside the box like trying > to access an existing database that uses RDBMS features heavily and > uses normal object naming. > > - Ian > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend > re: ruby && postgres -- i'll throw nitro and og into the hat. http://nitrohq.com nitro is the web presentation framework, Og is the ORM... ---------------------------------------------- require 'og' class Comment property :title, String, :sql => 'VARCHAR(60) NOT NULL' property :body, String property :author, String property :create_time, Time def initialize( title = '', body = '', author = '', time = Time.now ) @title = title @body = body @author = author @create_time = time end end og_psql = { :destroy_tables => true, # don't use this on a DB with tables that you DO NOT want to lose -- or set to false :store => :psql, :user => 'rthompso', :password => 'rthompso', :name => 'test' } #Og.table_prefix = '' # remove og generated table prefix db = Og.setup(og_psql) c = Comment.new('Title', 'Body', 'Author') # or # c = Comment.new # c.title = 'Hello' # c.body = 'World' # c.create_time = Time.now # c.author = 'tml' c.save ------------------------------ $ ruby -rubygems pgtest.rb I, [2006-03-29T20:16:50.278205 #16029] INFO -- : Og uses the Psql store. D, [2006-03-29T20:16:50.637238 #16029] DEBUG -- : Dropped database table ogcomment I, [2006-03-29T20:16:50.943499 #16029] INFO -- : Created table 'ogcomment'. D, [2006-03-29T20:16:50.963087 #16029] DEBUG -- : PostgreSQL processing foreign key constraints D, [2006-03-29T20:16:50.963532 #16029] DEBUG -- : PostgreSQL finished setting constraints. No action was taken in 0.00 seconds. rthompso@yos:/home/rthompso> $ psql test -c "select * from ogcomment;" title | body | author | create_time | oid -------+------+--------+---------------------+----- Title | Body | Author | 2006-03-29 20:16:50 | 1 (1 row) $ psql test -c "\d ogcomment;" Table "public.ogcomment" Column | Type | Modifiers -------------+-----------------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- title | character varying(60) | not null body | text | author | text | create_time | timestamp without time zone | oid | integer | not null default nextval('ogcomment_oid_seq'::regclass) Indexes: "ogcomment_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (oid)