Sage 100

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

Robert Wood

Robert Wood10-05-2010 07:02

Robert Wood

Robert Wood10-05-2010 11:15

  • 1.  MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 06:45
      |   view attached
    MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to import data from an ODBC data source (sotamas90). When I try to select the specific table, the system freezes. Since I don't do this everyday, I am probably skipping a step or two. Any thoughts?


  • 2.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 06:50
    Pulling in the sotamas is sometimes very slow.


  • 3.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 07:02
    Sometimes?


  • 4.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 07:46
    Just to display the table? So perhaps, I should just dump the table into Access and then import from the intermediate table.


  • 5.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 07:47
    That's what I usually do or create a pass through query in Access.


  • 6.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 07:49
    I think your ODBC is not setup correctly, this is a basic function. You're not retreiving anything but the data dictionary at this point.


  • 7.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 07:55
    Okay, I'll eat my words. This didn't used to be like this. It finally came out of it after reading 1 GB.


  • 8.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 08:08
    What words are for breakfast? Do they begin with W, T & F?


  • 9.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 08:23
    A process monitor trace shows that much of the time spent is reading.......views.


  • 10.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 09:31
    A distribution of I/O activity shows that during the load of the ODBC tables dialog - 74% of the requests were spend reading views and 0.5% was spend reading the data dictionary. This was an Import job - do people even IMPORT into views? It appears to allow it.


  • 11.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 11:13
    What the heck are views???? After two hours of letting my 200 install read the tables, it is still locked up. Is this a bug??


  • 12.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 11:15
    It's a design flaw.


  • 13.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 11:23
    Views are the pre-defined sets of fields from multiple tables that are suppose to address users that can't deal with linking. I can't imagine ever using them in a IMPORT! I'm not sure it is a flaw more than a bad idea.


  • 14.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 11:56
    Yeah, that's why I didn't go for bug as much as design flaw. I think it's WAD. I think of views as queries in Access.


  • 15.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 12:25
    I see your post on the community. Are you really hung? Do the read counts move in Task Manager? I ran my test locally and it took several minutes.


  • 16.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 13:08
    Like I said in the post, after two hours I killed the job. This entire mission is taking way too long. I was hoping for a quick way to bypass doing an Excel query, saving to a CSV and then importing. Back to figuring out why FRx runs on three out of four Clients WIN 7 32 OS workstations. Opened Sage case this morning. Waiting on a call back (probably tomorrow) from their lone FRx expert......


  • 17.  RE: MAS 200 V44 PU2. I am trying to create a VI to im

    Posted 10-05-2010 13:53
    I was thinking if you could create the import locally then export the job to the system on which it ultimately run. If your counts were at least moving then there's the hope that it would run reasonably locally and be workable.