Hi Tim,

I was just wondering if it might be possible to add an extra option into
the DBISAM server please?

I was wondering if it might be possible to remove all memory tables from
the server once the last user's connection has been removed / there are
no more users connected?

I know that this can be done per client/IP by the clients' application
using the RemoveAllRemoteMemoryTables procedure of the session.

The issue I am finding is with Terminal Services, where there may be
multiple users connecting to the database server from the one
connection. By calling this, I risk one user deleting another users
memory table.

However I'm also finding if a user crashes out of the application before
a procedure is run to delete the memory table the user has created, the
tables will remain until the server is restarted. (As some of the
queries with memory tables are significant in size) this can start to
cause an issue over time.

Having a property on the server (or even default action) to delete any
remaining memory tables if no more users are connected seems to be the
best option available that I can see.

Just wondering what you think?

Cheers mate

Adam.

Adam,

<< I was wondering if it might be possible to remove all memory tables from
the server once the last user's connection has been removed / there are no
more users connected? >>

So, you basically a RemoveAllMemoryTables whenever the session count is 0 on
the server ?  Sure, I think that can be done.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Hi Tim,

> << I was wondering if it might be possible to remove all memory tables
> from the server once the last user's connection has been removed / there
> are no more users connected? >>
>
> So, you basically a RemoveAllMemoryTables whenever the session count is
> 0 on the server ? Sure, I think that can be done.

Precisely - that's what I was thinking. Thanks heaps!

Cheers

Adam.

Tim

My vote to this feature.

And I would like to add one more:

A method for sum a specific column (in query/table components).The reason
for that is avoid network traffic (C/S) when I have a complex query that
result some columns and I need to sum one or more. I have been using the
"while not eof" method to get the sum, but in this way the traffic (and
speed) of process is high.

With this method the client just call the method, the server do the sum and
get back with result.

Eduardo

Eduardo,

<< And I would like to add one more:

A method for sum a specific column (in query/table components).The reason
for that is avoid network traffic (C/S) when I have a complex query that
result some columns and I need to sum one or more. I have been using the
"while not eof" method to get the sum, but in this way the traffic (and
speed) of process is high.

With this method the client just call the method, the server do the sum and
get back with result. >>

Noted.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Hi Eduardo,

Can you make the query a memory table, and then do a simple SUM query on
the resulting memory table? (This is what I do).

Best Regards

Adam.

Adam

Good point. But if this could be made using a simple method, it will avoid a
lot of processing.
Imagine if you have a query with a lot of records, when you save to a memory
or disk table then the engine need to tranfer all the data to this table
(takes a time), after that you need to call another query to sum the columns
(takes another time), and after all you have to remove the memory table
(takes another time).

Eduardo