Jet中的文件膨胀/压缩问题 [英] File bloating/compression problem in Jet
问题描述
我有一个正在使用Jet后端的项目，并且遇到Jet的'b $ b b'倾向于膨胀它的MDB文件。我可以压缩它，但这是一个麻烦。我考虑转换到福克斯后端，但没有使用过一个，这是
。我想
知道：
1）Foxpro后端是否也像这样膨胀？
2）难以如果你想要的只是骨干DBMS
东西（我处理所有用户界面）？分发狐狸二进制文件？
RDeW
" Riley DeWiley" < RI *********** @ gmail.com>在留言中写道
news：v4 ******************** @ seanet.com ...I有一个项目正在使用Jet后端，并且Jet的'倾向于膨胀它的MDB文件有问题。我可以压缩它，但这是一个麻烦。我正在考虑转换到Fox后端，但没有使用过。我想知道：
1）Foxpro后端是否也像这样膨胀？
2）如果你想要的只是裸骨，那么分发狐狸二进制文件是否很难
DBMS东西（我处理所有UI）？
你需要在Foxpro新闻组中提出这些问题。
如果你说你的前端是什么，那么你可能会有所帮助。
Jet数据库以及许多其他数据库需要不时进行压缩。我已经发现需要接近管理真实服务器数据库的时间和精力。
Fox处于相同的类别中。作为Jet的数据库，
所以也可能需要压缩 - 有人肯定会在Fox
新闻组中告诉你。
另一种选择是MSDE（在MDAC中）或新的（仍然在Beta中）SQL
Server Express版本。
Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP
" Larry Linson" <博***** @ localhost.not>写在
news：nt3we.3418
rE6.690@trnddc06：
" Riley DeWiley" < RI *********** @ gmail.com>在消息中写道
新闻：v4 ******************** @ seanet.com ...我有一个项目正在使用Jet后端，并且在Jet'倾向于膨胀它的MDB文件时遇到了麻烦。我可以压缩它但是这很麻烦。我正在考虑转换到Fox后端，但
没有使用过。我想知道：
1）Foxpro后端是否也像这样膨胀？
2）如果你想要的只是裸露的话，很难分发狐狸二进制文件骨骼DBMS < blockquote class =post_quotes> stuff（我处理所有UI）？
你需要在Foxpro新闻组中提出这些问题。
嗯，我不知道Foxpro具体，但是dBase文件总是需要打包，但许多xBase开发人员都有一个混乱的想法
记录删除和打包文件之间的关系。我已经看到了一些开发人员正在使用标记记录作为
过滤方法的应用程序。记录确实没有被删除，但是当用户打包文件时，
最终会永久地从数据库中消失。
但这与恢复未使用空间的过程完全相同，即
Access紧凑型。但是，Access文件有更多的开销，因为它将
存储在一个文件中（包括索引）。
如果你说出你的前面可能会有所帮助当你这样做时，就是这样。
Jet数据库和许多其他数据库需要在时间和时间之间进行压缩。 。 。 。
在任何地方都有任何数据库引擎：
1.自动恢复其存储文件中未使用的空间，并且
/>
2.维护数据页面的最有效订购
自动
我不知道，但我的经验很窄。
。 。 。我从来没有发现需要接近时间和管理真正的服务器数据库的努力。福克斯处于相同的类别范围内。数据库作为Jet，所以也可能需要压缩 -
某人肯定会在福克斯新闻组中告诉你。
另一种选择是MSDE（在MDAC中）或新的（仍然在
Beta）SQL Server Express版本。
任何有膨胀问题的人都可能遇到设计问题。我已经在任何MDB中都看不到令人无法接受的膨胀：
1.在某种程度上没有被破坏，或者
>
2.没有以不明智的方式使用数据文件中的记录而不是临时文件中的
记录。
另外，前端臃肿不用担心 - 你可以
只需更换前端。
但是一定要确保一个人在
前端无所作为违反上述第2项。
-
David W. Fenton < a rel =nofollowhref =http://www.bway.net/~dfentontarget =_ blank> http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
$ b bway dot net的$ b dfenton http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
I have a project that is using a Jet backend and having trouble with Jet''s
tendency to bloat it''s MDB file. I can compact it but it is a hassle. I am
considering switching to a Fox backend but have not used one. I want to
know:
1) Does the Foxpro backend also bloat like this?
2) Is it hard to distribute fox binaries if all you want is bare bones DBMS
stuff (I handle all the UI)?
RDeW
"Riley DeWiley" <ri***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:v4********************@seanet.com...I have a project that is using a Jet backend and having trouble with Jet''s
tendency to bloat it''s MDB file. I can compact it but it is a hassle. I am
considering switching to a Fox backend but have not used one. I want to
know:
1) Does the Foxpro backend also bloat like this?
2) Is it hard to distribute fox binaries if all you want is bare bones DBMS stuff (I handle all the UI)?
You need to ask these questions in a Foxpro newsgroup.
It might help if you''d say what your front-end is, when you do.
Jet databases, and many others, need to be compacted from time to time. I''ve
never found that need to come close to the time and effort of administering
a true server database. Fox is in the same "category" of databases as Jet,
so may also require compacting -- someone surely can tell you in the Fox
newsgroup.
Another option would be MSDE (in the MDAC) or the new (still in Beta) SQL
Server Express version.
Larry Linson
Microsoft Access MVP
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localhost.not> wrote in
news:nt3we.3418
rE6.690@trnddc06:
"Riley DeWiley" <ri***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:v4********************@seanet.com...I have a project that is using a Jet backend and having trouble
with Jet''s tendency to bloat it''s MDB file. I can compact it but
it is a hassle. I am considering switching to a Fox backend but
have not used one. I want to know:
1) Does the Foxpro backend also bloat like this?
2) Is it hard to distribute fox binaries if all you want is bare
bones DBMSstuff (I handle all the UI)?
You need to ask these questions in a Foxpro newsgroup.
Well, I don''t know about Foxpro specifically, but dBase files always
needed to be packed, but many xBase developers had a confused idea
of the relationship between record deletions and packing files. I''ve
seen apps where the developer was using marking records deleted as a
filtering method. The records really weren''t being deleted, but
eventually disappeared from the database permanently when the user
packed the files.
But it''s exactly the same process of recovering unused space as an
Access compact. The Access file has more overhead, though, since it
stores everything in a single file (including indexes).
It might help if you''d say what your front-end is, when you do.
Jet databases, and many others, need to be compacted from time to
time. . . .
Are there any db engines anywhere that:
1. recover unused space within its storage files automatically, AND
2. maintain the most efficient ordering for the data pages
automatically
I don''t know of any, but my experience is pretty narrow.
. . . I''ve never found that need to come close to the time and
effort of administering a true server database. Fox is in the same
"category" of databases as Jet, so may also require compacting --
someone surely can tell you in the Fox newsgroup.
Another option would be MSDE (in the MDAC) or the new (still in
Beta) SQL Server Express version.
Anyone having bloat problems probably has a design problem. I''ve
never seen unacceptable bloat in any MDB that:
1. was not corrupted in some way, OR
2. was not being used in a way that unwisely added/deleted bunches
of records in the data file instead of in a temp file.
Also, front end bloat is not something to worry about -- you can
just replace the front end.
But one should definitely make sure one is doing nothing in the
front end to violate item 2) above.
--
David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
这篇关于Jet中的文件膨胀/压缩问题的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
