Conference ilbbak::ibi_focus

    
    I share your view that large reporting systems with rdb should not
    be undertaken with Focus because of the reasons you cited and because
    the additional reporting power of Focus is NEGATED by its
    unduly cumbersome and problem-prone rdb interface.
    
    I was asked to generate a set of "standard reports" using Focus
    from an rdb database with a dozen or so relations. Even using the
    DEC-modified version of Autordb.Fex, mapping the database was very
    cumbersome. Editing the .mas and .acx files to add or modify aliases
    caused obscure run-time errors so I had to leave them as generated which
    was not really optimal. 
    
    Using TABLETALK with this rdb database was a JOKE because the fields
    listed for the user to select were all the same (Focus truncates
    to 12 characters - enough to capture the relation-prefix portion
    of the dataname on this database! [the design of which I had no
    influence]).
    
    I finally gave up and generated the "standard reports" in Powerhouse.
    What a difference! All I had to do was to declare the database on
    a single (File) Screen and Powerhouse had all it needed to map the
    entire structure. No need to declare each relation separately as
    a segment. Full 31-character dataname support. English-like syntax.
    Ability to COMPILE reports (avoiding unanticipated run-time errors
    due to syntax problems).
        
    I was able to generate all the "standard reports" requested in
    Powerhouse in LESS time than it took to produce the first debugged
    report in Focus! 
    
    In the final analysis, my opinion is:
    
    1.	IBI Focus will not be a suitable tool for reporting from rdb/VMS
    	until its rdb interface is SIGNIFICANTLY improved.
    
    2.	Powerhouse (Quiz) is the best tool for generating reports of
   	up to moderate complexity from rdb.
    
    3.	Very complex reporting may require use of traditional 3GL
	approaches or exporting of data from rdb into data structures
    	that advanced reporting tools like Focus can handle in an
	acceptable manner.

    Another advantage of using Powerhouse is its ability to Write as
    well as Read rdb databases. Its screen generator puts the Focus
    equivalent to shame in an even more startling contrast than exists
    in the reporting environment. A transaction processing component
    makes loading rdb databases from RMS files a snap. Etc. etc.    

    For more information on Powerhouse, see Notes Conference
    PICA::POWERHOUSE.
    

	> Jo�l	(Waiting for a Digital true reporting tool)

    There is a true reporting tool made internally, it's part of a
    4GL/RDBMS business productivity tool called GENiSYS.  Even Bob (Mr.
    Powerhouse) Bibeault was impressed with GENiSYS's ad-hoc inquiry
    & reporting capabilities.  Other features include an VERY active data
    dictionary (part of the DBA control tool) and user-friendly common
    interface.
    
    Sorry for adding a plug for GENiSYS, I couldn't resist!!
    
    Eric Frere
    

    
    Yes, Eric is right, I was impressed with some of GENiSYS' capabilities
    but he neglected to tell you that overall I found the tool inferior
    to both Focus and Powerhouse.
    
    More to the point, GENiSYS cannot read or write RDB databases which
    is really what this note is concerned with.
    
    Thank you, Mr. GENiSYS, please let us know when your tool can deal
    with native VAX data structures. As I understand it, GENiSYS would
    require substantial reprogramming to accomplish this.
    
    Correct me if I'm wrong.
    
    Regards,
    Bob

    I was just mentioning to Jo�l that Digital does indeed have a reporting
    tool.  Whether GENiSYS is superior or inferior to other (in this
    case, non-internal) products is not based on one person's opinion
    and certainly should not be discussed in this conference.  We should
    stick to FOCUS-related issues.
    
    Eric
    
    BTW, You're right, GENiSYS has its own db file structure that's
    different from Rdb but since when Rdb is the acme of relational
    databases??

    
    rdb/VMS is the relational database tool of choice as of Version
    3.0 as documented in the DSTAR white paper entitled:
    
    Rdb/VMS Version 3.0 - THE RECOMMENDED CHOICE AS A RELATIONAL DATABASE
    LANGUAGE, 1-Aug-88, by Rob Chaddock, DSTAR Advanced Development
    Application Engineering. Corporate Financial Strategies, for which
    I work, strongly endorses the DSTAR position.
    
    What is relevent here is that IBI needs to improve its interface
    to rdb if Focus is going to continue to be a viable tool as we migrate
    to rdb/VMS as the common relational database structure. The way
    Cognos has developed the interface is a model for the rest of the
    world to follow, including IBI.
    
    What is irrelevent here is GENiSYS since it lacks the capability
    to interface with either Focus or rdb/VMS.
    
    The Corporate Financial Strategies position is using VAX-native
    data structures like RMS and rdb/VMS is MORE IMPORTANT than which
    tool is used to access that data. Focus is still viable since it
    can read rdb/VMS but the interface, once again, needs MUCH improvement.
    
    

	I was intentionnaly provocative in .0 and I am a bit surprised
	that nobody contradicted what I said.
	Does it means that :

	1. Nobody have really done any large reporting system on Rdb using
	   FOCUS.
	2. The ones who have done it fully agree with what I said.
	3. Or they are so happy that they don't fell the need to share their
	   experience.
	
	Since then we organized a FOCUS/Rdb course and I must admit that
	the person from IBI answered all questions we had. She also gave me
	a training manual for IBM DB2 database and, as I was expecting, the
	problems in FOCUS/DB2 look like the ones in FOCUS/Rdb.

	When I complete my studies on POWERHOUSE ans GENiSYS I will explain
	why FOCUS is a good tool :-)   -	Jo�l

    
    I am sorry I was not able to get involed with this note when it
    was originally posted, but I was rapped up with making RDB and
    focus work together.  I have attempted and for the most part
    have succeeded in developing a large scale reporting system with
    with both of these products.  When I decided to go with a focus
    rdb architecture I wanted to stick with a complete DIGITAL solution.
    However, our product line could not meet my needs both in the areas
    of perfomance and functionality.  I needed a repoting environment
    that our users (finance,marketing) would be able to use without
    having to be an expert programmer.  I wanted something that they
    would be able to pick up and use any time they wanted to. Not
    something that would require a total reeducation every time it was
    used.  Tabletalk gave me this.  The DEC products that would have
    done this are teamdata or decreporter, but teamdate is restricted
    to tabular type reports and really slows down around 10k records.
    Decreporter has to link into rdb via datatrieve. Enough said.
    
    I looked at GENiSYS, and it is nice but it is so far away from the
    digital information architecture that I left it for the politicians
    to waste their time arguing about.  For you powerhouse fans,
    I apologize for not taking the time to check it out, good luck.
    
    Now, I would like to say a few things about Focus.  I.B.I. had better
    get their act together real soon and start making some changes or
    they are going to find them selves out of a lot of business.  I
    am really angry at their documentation. It is often vauge and
    missleading.  They had better expand the length of file names and
    field names, after all they are running on a vax not a tandy.
    They had better find a way to communicate with the cdd and get
    rid of those cumbersome .mas and .acx files.
    From my experiences with using focus I have found its reporting
    capabilitys quite powerful and easy to use.  However, it is not
    a digital product so it took a lot of time to get it to work
    with rdb the way I wanted it to.  
    
    A warning to focus and a hint to DEC.  As soon as DEC can come out
    with a product that has a query tool like TABLETALK I will delete
    focus from out system.  If I had the time I'd write  SQLTALK.
    
    Mike

	Mike,

	Thank you very much for your input. I could have write every single
	word you wrote. Both the positive aspects and the warnings addressed
	to IBI are well phrased.

	"If I had money I'd write SQLTALK". If nobody in Digital is doing it 
	(that I can't believe) we should do it. Bet you !

		Jo�l