Hi Marco,

i think this is a realy good idea.

Greetings
Jens

Hi Marco,

Maybe you can ask your customers which of the features they want to see next .

Greetings
Jens

P.S. For me the memory problem is realy important :-)

Jens, couldn't you use TOracleQuery (which, I believe, needs less memory) and copy the results into a memory table which supports compression, like TkbmMemTable?

As you're talking about read-only datasets, I thought that this could be an option for you...

Holger,

that's not possible. The overhead is too big.

For example. With a dataset there is no effort to load only 1000 records and on demand the next 1000. Doing this tOracleQuery and MemDatasets you got a lot of work.

Greetings
Jens

Hi,

Copying the results into a memory table takes some time. Holger, your solution for me sound like: "why don't you create a new TDataSet descendant class, inherited form TkbmMemTable, which will be using TOracleQuery for fetching records" . It looks like a new implementation of TOracleDataSet! I know it is possible, we have in our application cached DataSets based on TkbmMemTable (which use TOracleQuery) for querying lookups' values, but they don't give us all functionality TOracleDataSets do (eg. QBE).

But to modify records, we can first copy them into memory table (eg. TkbmMemTable). But for browsing only, it takes to much time (for implemementing this too). So dynamic size buffers for read-only TOracleDataSet could be a great feature .

Best regards,
Daniel

Yep!!! :-)

Greetings
Jens

Hi,

Is there any chance for implementing this functionality, described in this thread over one year ago?
Or is it, like people says in my country, "the dream of cut head"?

Best regards,
Daniel Stoch

This turned out to be a little bit more work than expected, but it is still on our to-do list. Maybe we can add this in 4.1.

4.1 ??

Any timeframe, list of planed changes or so ?

Greetings
Jens

Not yet.