Our company has licensed a financial application written in Progress 4GL and having a Progress database. We are using Progress 9.1D. Like most U.S. firms our desktop computers run Microsoft Windows and MS Office. To make everyday reporting easier we copy tables from the Progress database to MS SQL Server via DTS. Sometimes the import fails because the data coming from Progress exceeds the data length specified in the Progress database schema.
I have worked with several relational and hierarchial database systems. None would allow storing 60 characters in a column declared as 50 characters. Why does Progress allow this? Please don't suggest an upside to this. It's just poor administration by the database engine.
After seven years of working with Progress I still see the same problem areas: severe difficulty making successful connections with non-Progress systems, non-standard use of the 'dash' character within names, triggers that execute outside the database, and GUI that looks forced.
Surely the reason for Progress could not be licensing; you could get a free copy of Oracle for Linux. I don't understand why the software authors who have developed Progress applications have not ported those apps to mainstream languages and databases.
Tip of the day: The other relational database engines do not require manually locking/unlocking records in code. In this area Progress reminds me of dBase III.
Just my two cents.
I have worked with several relational and hierarchial database systems. None would allow storing 60 characters in a column declared as 50 characters. Why does Progress allow this? Please don't suggest an upside to this. It's just poor administration by the database engine.
After seven years of working with Progress I still see the same problem areas: severe difficulty making successful connections with non-Progress systems, non-standard use of the 'dash' character within names, triggers that execute outside the database, and GUI that looks forced.
Surely the reason for Progress could not be licensing; you could get a free copy of Oracle for Linux. I don't understand why the software authors who have developed Progress applications have not ported those apps to mainstream languages and databases.
Tip of the day: The other relational database engines do not require manually locking/unlocking records in code. In this area Progress reminds me of dBase III.
Just my two cents.