Forte Express

Have anyone ever experienced any problem working on a multi-layer
interface?. Express sometimes raises ExpressConcurrencyException
error while I am saving. I wonder if is something to do with invalid object
pointers. Your help is appreciated.
Garry

hi :
Espenlas, thank you for help us. it worked. But we have a question :
For what there is the repository local
c:\forte\userapp\express\cl1\reposcpy\exseed ?
Regardless,
Bruno Muñoz
GMD S.A.
[email protected]
Lima, Perú
From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 1996 9:22 PM
To: Ronald Celis; [email protected]
Subject: Re: Forte Express
Ronald,
When I first installed Forte Express on my MSWindows client I found
that the
parameters on the command line for the icons were set up incorrectly.
This
might be your problem.
In order to rectify it I had to change the parameters on the FTEXEC to
the
following:
-fs -fi ct:C:\FORTE\USERAPP\EXPRESS\CL1\EXPRESS -fr
ct:c:\forte\repos\local
(where c:\forte\repos\local.dat and .idx are my local repository).
I've also set up two other icons. One is to run distibuted using the
local
repository (note the absence of the -fs option):
-fi ct:C:\FORTE\USERAPP\EXPRESS\CL1\EXPRESS -fr
ct:c:\forte\repos\local
The second one is used to run distibuted using a central repository:
-fi ct:C:\FORTE\USERAPP\EXPRESS\CL1\EXPRESS -fr CENTRAL_REPOS
(where CENTRAL_REPOS is the name of the central repository).
Regards,
Shawn Espenlaub ([email protected])
Sealcorp Holdings Ltd.
Level 38 Central Park
152-158 St. George's Terrace
PERTH, WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6000
61 9 265 5454
______________________________ Reply Separator
Subject: Forte Express
Author: Ronald Celis <[email protected]> at INTERNET
Date: 05/6/96 9:37 AM
I need help, somebody now how can i execute forte express in
standalone, the message that i have is that can't open de repository (
but i trying to execute in standalone ). I have de Forté 2.0.D.2
version.
Wich somebody can help me.
Ronald Celis B.
GMD S.A.
[email protected]
Lima - Perú

Similar Messages

Re: Forte Express Question

I tend to agree with Chris Kelly's earlier posting that
the problem is not with date, but rather with the other
fields. Forte takes care of date format that Oracle can
understand.
Oracle's will allow year entry of between -4713 and +4713.
Forte chose October 1582 as the zero date because it
represents the beginning of the modern calendar as we
know it, called the Gregorian Calendar.
Some interesting reading follows...
From http://www.sprinc.com/marktime.htm
Imagine that for an entire year you were twelve minutes
early for your appointments. This would be a good thing right?
Aren't we told to be early for our appointments -- that it is
courteous to be early and usually unacceptable to be late?
Well, if we agree on these things, then why on Earth would the
twelve minutes between the old Julian Calendar and the New Style
Gregorian Calendar be such a big deal? The answer lies in time
itself. You see, those twelve minutes accumulated over the years,
decades, and centuries so that by the 1500's the Julian Calendar
had raced ahead of the Sun by ten days!
In October, 1582 Pope Gregory XIII implemented the following
changes to the old Julian Calendar:
- New Year's day changed from March 25 to January 1.
- The calendar advanced by 10 days, making the day after Oct 4,
1582 into Oct 15, 1582.
- Updated and refined Leap Year rules:
1.Years evenly divisible by four are to be
considered Leap Years.
2.Century years (double 00) must be evenly divisible by
400 (2000 is a leap year).
3.The years 4000, 8000, and 12000 are considered to be
"common years" (not leap years).
4.Century years divisible by 900 will be leap years only
if the remainder is 200 or 600 (2000 is a leap year).
The changes above make the calendar accurate to 1 day in 44,000 years.
At 06:21 PM 3/31/97 -0500, you wrote:
Dan Elias wrote:
I am incurring the following error message when I go to insert a
record in a Forte Express application. I think the message relates to a
DATE field? Forte Express apparently reads the Oracle db and creates a
DATE field which include DATE&TIME, and Oracle cannot read this! At any
rate can you please contact me when you get a chance.
******** ERROR MESSAGE ********
=======================================================================
SYSTEM ERROR: Execute failed for dynamic SQL statement 3, error from
database
is:
ORA-01438: value larger than specified precision allows for this
column
Class: qqdb_ValueException with ReasonCode: DB_ER_CONVERSION
Detected at: qqdb_OracleVendorInfo::DoOexn
Last TOOL statement: method BusinessDBMgr.ExecuteSql
Error Time: Tue Mar 25 15:22:53
Oracle error: 1438, Server: devsrv1, Database: oratest, UserName:
prc
Database Statement: insert into MPRC(MPRC_SERVICE_TYPE,
MPRC_EFFECT_DATE_AGREED, MPRC_EFFECT_DATE_NEGOTIATED,
MPRC_EFFECT_DATE_REQUESTED, MPRC_DATE_RECEIVED,
MPRC_RAW_MATERIAL_DOLLARS,
MPRC_RAW_MATERIAL_TYPE, MPRC_RAW_MATERIAL, MPRC_INCREASE_TYPE,
MPRC_PCT_INCREASE_NEGOTIATED, MPRC_PCT_INCREASE_REQUESTED,
MPRC_TIME_RECORD_CHANGED, MPRC_DATE_RECORD_CHANGED,
MPRC_WHO_CHANGED_RECORD, MPRC_DANA_TYPE_SAVINGS,
MPRC_PROB_PROJECT_SUCCESS, MPRC_OTHER_COST, MPRC_TOOLING_COST,
MPRC_PROJECT_STATUS, MPRC_PROJECT_COMPLETED,
MPRC_MATERIAL_PRICE_VAR,
MPRC_ENGINEERING_HOURS, MPRC_PIRO_REJECTED_DATE,
MPRC_PIRO_APPROVED_DATE,
MPRC_PIRO_SUBMITTED_DATE, MPRC_IRR, MPRC_TRUCK_WEIGHT_CHANGE,
MPRC_PLANT_IMPACT_EXPLAIN, MPRC_PLANT_IMPACT,
MPRC_WARRANTY_IMPACT_EXPLAIN, MPRC_WARRANTY_IMPACT,
MPRC_QUALITY_IMPACT_EXPLAIN, MPRC_QUALITY_IMPACT,
MPRC_PIRO_NUMBER,
MPRC_YEAR, MPRC_PROJECT_DESCRIPTION, MPRC_INCREASE_DECREASE,
BUYR_BUYER_ID, CMTM_COMMODITY_TEAM, RESC_REASON_CODE,
SLOC_SUPPLIER_CODE,
MPRC_PROJECT_ID) values
(:p1,:p2,:p3,:p4,:p5,:p6,:p7,:p8,:p9,:p10,:p11,:p12,:p13,:p14,:p15,:p16,:p17
,:p18,:p19,:p20,:p21,:p22,:p23,:p24,:p25,:p26,:p27,:p28,:p29,:p30,:p31,:p32,
:p33,:p34,:p35,:p36,:p37,:p38,:p39,:p40,:p41,:p42)
with input values: , 14-Oct-1582 19:00:00, 14-Oct-1582 19:00:00,
14-Oct-1582 19:00:00, 14-Oct-1582 19:00:00, 0, , , , 0, 0, , , , ,
0, 0,
0, , , , , , , , 2, 1, test P, 0, test W, 0, test Q, 0, 12345,
1997,
Desc., I, A, 20, I, 002100, 12300
Exception occurred (remotely) on partition
"prcMaterialPriceChangeAMWindows_CL0_Part", (partitionId =
C039E19E-6D81-11D0-A5BB-B3F4D289AA77:0x6db:0x1c, taskId =
[C039E19E-6D81-11D0-A5BB-B3F4D289AA77:0x6fb:0x2.12]) in
application "Forte
Runtime", pid 13255 on node devsrv1 in environment CentralEnv.Hi Dan,
You and I spoke briefly about this problem early last week, but now that
I see the actual error message printed out in your posting here, I think
I see where your difficulties are coming from. Take a look at the
actual date values that you are attempting to insert into your Oracle
table (about 10-15 lines up from the bottom of your error message
above). "14-Oct-1582 19:00:00." When you create a DateTimeData object
in Forte and do not assign a value to it, this is the value that it is
given by default. Pretty much all systems have some date that they
consider to be the beginning of time - apparently Forte chose
mid-October, 1582. My suspicion is that 1582 is before the dawn of
Oracle time, and thus Oracle rejects the attempted insert. I didn't
think of it when we last spoke, but I have seen this exact problem
before with Microsoft SQL Server - 1582 is too early a date for it to
recognize. Try going into SQL*Plus and doing an insert with the 14 Oct,
1582 date and see what happens.
Hope this helps!
Dale

Lee Wei wrote:
>
I tend to agree with Chris Kelly's earlier posting that
the problem is not with date, but rather with the other
fields. Forte takes care of date format that Oracle can
understand.
Oracle's will allow year entry of between -4713 and +4713.After testing a few things out today, I have to say I agree with you.
Oracle was perfectly happy with Oct 14, 1582 as a date, and even when I
got the format wrong, I never saw the "value larger than specified
precision" error that Dan Elias was seeing. Thus, it probably IS one of
the other fields causing the problem. My db experience has primarily
been Microsoft SQL Server, where 1582 is NOT a valid date.
Forte chose October 1582 as the zero date because it
represents the beginning of the modern calendar as we
know it, called the Gregorian Calendar.
Some interesting reading follows...And thanks for the interesting facts! I was vaguely aware of some of
it, but didn't know the exact date, for one thing.
Dale

Forte Express 2.0

Hi
Has anyone managed to install Forte Express 2.0 over Forte 3.0.E.0 as a
complete standalone running under Windows 95 with no other nodes connected.
Everything seems OK until I try to connect to Oracle Lite with an ODBC
connection, it says it cannot find or run the DB Browser.
Thanks
Mike

The reverse engineering for SQL Server is possible as long as the owner of
the table is not DBO.
Create the tables as a non dbo user. I our case we actually had to set one
up especially for this purpose.
---------------------- Forwarded by Amos G. Radford on 09/26/97 12:38 PM
[email protected]
09/26/97 12:05 PM MST
Please respond to [email protected]
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected] (bcc: Amos G. Radford)
Subject: Re: Forte Express 2.0
Classification: Internal Use Only
Hi David,
Below you say that the reverse engineering through ODBC is not
supported, then how is the reverse engineering achieved with SQL Server?
I assume most ODBC drivers are not capable but the one for SQL Server
is. Do you know of any other ODBC drivers that are capable of reverse
engineering a database?
Cheers,
Allister
From: David Muskatel <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 10:18:47 -0700
Subject: Re: Forte Express 2.0
Mike,
Forte Express will work with an ODBC database. However, the reverse
engineering feature of importing table schemas into the Express business
model is not supported with ODBC. So you need to follow the path of
creating your business model classes and filling in the attributes. Once
complete, you can generate an application to run against the ODBCdatabase.
If you have NT with native access to Oracle instead of ODBC, you would
be able to use the reverse engineering feature.
The message you received was attempting to start the reverse engineering
table browser.
- -Dave Muskatel
David Muskatel 15245 Shady GroveRoad
Eastern Region Manager, Forte Consulting Suite 490
Forte Software Rockville, MD 20850
phone: 301-721-1916 fax: 301-564-9891
email: [email protected]
At 01:33 PM 9/26/97 +0200, you wrote:
Hi
Has anyone managed to install Forte Express 2.0 over Forte 3.0.E.0 as a
complete standalone running under Windows 95 with no other nodes
connected.
>>
Everything seems OK until I try to connect to Oracle Lite with an ODBC
connection, it says it cannot find or run the DB Browser.
Thanks
Mike
David Muskatel 15245 Shady GroveRoad
Eastern Region Manager, Forte Consulting Suite 490
Forte Software Rockville, MD 20850
phone: 301-721-1916 fax: 301-564-9891
email: [email protected]

Locking with Forte Express and Sybase

Hello,
We are developing a program in Forte Express with data in Sybase as
RDBMS. An other program (developed in Smalltalk) also uses this data in
Sybase. In our situation both the program in Smalltalk and in Forte
Express need to view and change the same data.
I think it is possible to use Forte's native locking. This actually
means using Sybase's locking features, but in our situation we currently
don't use Sybase's locking features. So using Forte's native locking is
not an option.
How do we guarantee that both the user of the Smalltalk program and the
user of the Forte Express program are able to view and change the
correct data? Does anybody also has the problem or (better) has a
solution for this?
I want to thank you in advance for any suggestions.
Greetings,
Hein Baan
Hein Baan E-mail: [email protected]
Mediasystemen BV, a Triple P Company Phone: +31 23 5259010
PO Box 32, 2060 AA Bloemendaal, Fax: +31 23 5260072
Netherlands

Hello,
We are developing a program in Forte Express with data in Sybase as
RDBMS. An other program (developed in Smalltalk) also uses this data in
Sybase. In our situation both the program in Smalltalk and in Forte
Express need to view and change the same data.
I think it is possible to use Forte's native locking. This actually
means using Sybase's locking features, but in our situation we currently
don't use Sybase's locking features. So using Forte's native locking is
not an option.
How do we guarantee that both the user of the Smalltalk program and the
user of the Forte Express program are able to view and change the
correct data? Does anybody also has the problem or (better) has a
solution for this?
I want to thank you in advance for any suggestions.
Greetings,
Hein Baan
Hein Baan E-mail: [email protected]
Mediasystemen BV, a Triple P Company Phone: +31 23 5259010
PO Box 32, 2060 AA Bloemendaal, Fax: +31 23 5260072
Netherlands

Forte Express - Transaction control

Hi
In our current model, the database automatically generates a key
for our objects when we insert them into the database (we are
using the Informix Serial type to do this - but it could be any
similar mechanism).
The problem we encounter is that within Forte Express, we want
to be able to create several related objects simultaneously and
then commit the whole thing in one transaction. However, the
objects reference eachother by their key and until the Insert
has been committed to the database, we don't know what the key is.
Has anyone encountered a similar problem?
Thank you,
Veronika Irvine
CrossKeys Systems Corporation
[email protected]

Yes, and for this reason we have decided against using Informix or Sybase
serial types. Oracle Sequences
are ok since you can prefetch them and, hence, "know" what they are before
and after your transaction.
For keys which are used in object traversals, we implement a table-based key
generation system. We have
a table with two columns, table-name and next-key. Each kind of key has a
row in this table, and we access the table in the following way: (I think it
is a pretty standard approach)
begin transaction
update keytable set nextkey = nextkey + 1 where tablename = :sometablename
select nextkey from keytable where tablename = :sometablename
end transaction
This ensures protection in a concurrent environment, and is a small enough
transaction to handle lots of
requests. Note the downside to this approach is that if the key isn't used
you will end up with "holes" in the key sequences.
Another technique you can try is to have a temporary key between the
objects. A timestamp to millisecond
resolution might serve you in this case.
-John
At 02:20 PM 8/2/96 -0400, you wrote:
Hi
In our current model, the database automatically generates a key
for our objects when we insert them into the database (we are
using the Informix Serial type to do this - but it could be any
similar mechanism).
The problem we encounter is that within Forte Express, we want
to be able to create several related objects simultaneously and
then commit the whole thing in one transaction. However, the
objects reference eachother by their key and until the Insert
has been committed to the database, we don't know what the key is.
Has anyone encountered a similar problem?
Thank you,
Veronika Irvine
CrossKeys Systems Corporation
[email protected]
John Jamison
Sage Solutions, Inc.
353 Sacramento Street, Suite 1360
San Francisco, CA 94111
415 392 7243 x 508
[email protected]

Forte Express Equivalent in Java

Hi
Can any body tell me Forte Express equivalent in Java?
Thanks in advance

Hi
Can any body tell me Forte Express equivalent in Java?
Thanks in advance

Forte Express - Assocaion Between Entities of different Models

Hi Everyone
To my knowledge Forte Express doesn't have straightforward approach to establish relation between entities of various business models. Customization must be in-order to achieve the same.
It is possible to establish relations between sub-models of a business model
I have lack of knowledge about the latest versions of the Forte Express. I want to know if the latest version of the Forte Express provides any of the following:
1. Customize the source code generation to seperate a single business model to multiple projects. Each Sub-model of the Business model corresponds to a new project. If my Business Model has 3 Sub-models, I want 3 projects.
2. Allow establishing relations between entities of different Business Models while modelling itself.
Thanking you in advance
Kind Regards,
GS
G Sreenivasulu
Sr Tech Consultant
Goldstone Technologies Ltd
Secunderabad
India.

Hi Everyone
To my knowledge Forte Express doesn't have straightforward approach to establish relation between entities of various business models. Customization must be in-order to achieve the same.
It is possible to establish relations between sub-models of a business model
I have lack of knowledge about the latest versions of the Forte Express. I want to know if the latest version of the Forte Express provides any of the following:
1. Customize the source code generation to seperate a single business model to multiple projects. Each Sub-model of the Business model corresponds to a new project. If my Business Model has 3 Sub-models, I want 3 projects.
2. Allow establishing relations between entities of different Business Models while modelling itself.
Thanking you in advance
Kind Regards,
GS
G Sreenivasulu
Sr Tech Consultant
Goldstone Technologies Ltd
Secunderabad
India.

Forte Express Application performance

Greetings,
We are in the process of developing an application using Forte Express.
We have approx. 20 windows, each of which may have 4-5 folders or a nested array
window. The windows work in pairs. One window will show a brief version of
records in an array window. When we double-click on a row, we popup a detailed
version of the record which also has folders to show associations with this
record.
Our development is taking place on a Dec Alpha 2100 and two 250's. The
performance was not that bad considering we were in development mode and several
instances of Express was running on each machine.
We recently had to give a demo of what we had accomplished so far. We
deployed the application and ran it on a 486 66Mhz running Win95 and it was
incredibly slow. We also ran it on a Pentium-133 and was not much better.
The delay for popping up detailed windows after double clicking in an array
field could easily take 10 seconds. We have to run our application on an
Dec Alpha 2100 to get descent performance!
Has anybody else experienced this poor performance? What is your
performance like? Any comments/suggestions appreciated.
Note: Our database server was a Sparc 5 with 64Meg. Pretty slow but
we only had one user accessing the database. The Server was also
not compiled since we were told by the Forte people that the gain
in performance did not warrant the extra trouble required to
compile.
Regards,
____ \ / ____ CrossKeys Systems Corporation
___ \ X / ___
\ X X / Crosskeys Centre Peter Kelly
X X X 350 Terry Fox Drive Software Designer
___/ X X \___ Kanata, Ontario
____/ X \____ Canada K2K 2P5 [email protected]
_____/ \_____ (613) 591-1600 Ext. 8247

Gunnar, I had dbms_snapshot.refresh embedded on one page as "after submit" process and it was enough to crash the application. Apex pages are rendered on-the-fly and the (materialized) view refresh takes somehow too long.
The same thing happens if you create a regular view that selects from remote database. Connection speed between the host and remote database doesn't seem to matter.
My solution is NOT to refresh materialized views in Apex pages at all. I've recreated my materialized views with the following parameters
REFRESH COMPLETE ON DEMAND START WITH sysdate+0 NEXT sysdate+1/24
so that it refreshes every hour and it works perfectly. Let me know if it helps.
Przemek

DDE with Forte/Express

Subject: DDE with Forte/Express 7/28/97 1:01 PM
Has anyone tried feeding data into Forte via an external system? The manual has a few pages containing command etc but I would like to find some actual code/examples. We are looking into feeding data from perhaps Reuter into Forte. At this point I am not familiar with DDE nor Reuter. Is there somebody who have experience in this? How much work is involved and can you send me any examples or documentations?
Internet: [email protected]

I had a problem similar to this trying to install Express 1.0.c. with Forte
2.f installed. I had to reinstall E2 and then install Express and then
reinstall 2F
It appears to be working now.
Chris Capadouca,
Forte First Strike Team
SHL Systemhouse Inc
[email protected]
From: Garry Fong[SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 1997 11:03 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Forte express installation
RE: Forte express v. 1.0.c.2
Does anyone would give a hand regarding Forte express installation?
I encount a problem where the setup.exe always returns a message
--"...Unable to find forte directory, installation is unable to
continue..",
despite the fact that I have had a up-and-running versin of Forte.
In the warming message, it also mentions that they need version of
2.0.E.2. I only have Forte system software v2.0.F.2. Does it matter? Is it
because I have a latter version of the software which makes Forte
express unable to detect?
Many thks!
Garry
[email protected]

Problem with Forte Express, on priorities of the ORDERBYconstraints .

In my businessModel I've got 2 Tables :
Table MACHINE : - MACHINE_ID, MACHINE_NAME, MACHINE_BRAND, MACHINE_MODEL,
USERS_ID (which is a foreign key of the table USERS.)
Table ACTIVITY : - ACTIVITY_ID, ACTIVITY_NAME.
In my applicationModel I've got a businessClass : MACHINE -> OutlineField.
In this Outlinefield, I display : MACHINE_NAME, MACHINE_BRAND,
MACHINE_MODEL, ACTIVITY_NAME (Which is a joint with the table ACTIVITY, made
by
Express).
So, the MACHINEQuery contains 6 constants : ATTR_MACHINE_ID,
ATTR_MACHINE_NAME, ATTR_MACHINE_BRAND, ATTR_MACHINE_MODEL, ATTR_USERS_ID,
ATTR_ACTIVITY
With your help, last time I've been able to order data by every kinds of
field.
But, when I put several ORDERBY restrictions in the restricUserSearch(),the
priority is not respected any more.
Here I want to order data first by ACTIVITY and then by MACHINE_NAME.
So I've writen this code :
in the RestrictUserSearch(searchCriteria:BusinessQuery) event of MACHINE :
/* ******** Here I Order MACHINE DATA by activity *********************** */
myActivityQ : ACTIVITYQuery = new() ;
myActivityQ.AddConstraint(
attr = ACTIVITYQuery.ATTR_ACTIVITY_NAME,
operation = ConstraintOperation.OP_ORDERBY);
//Set fields to retrieve from USERS table
myActivityQ.AddAttr(attr = ACTIVITYQuery.ATTR_ACTIVITY_NAME ) ;
searchCriteria.AddAttr(
attr = MACHINEQuery.ATTR_ACTIVITY
query = myUsersQ);
/* ******** Here I order MACHINE by MACHINE_NAME *********************** */
searchCriteria.AddConstraint(
attr = MACHINEQuery.ATTR_MACHINE_NAME,
operation = ConstraintOperation.OP_ORDERBY);
The result of this code is that DATA are ordered only by MACHINE_NAME. I
don't understand why .
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated,
Thanks for your help. :o)
Sébastien MARIE
E-MAIL : [email protected]
TEL : 04.93.95.40.62

I suppose you don't use qualified parameters.
http://download-uk.oracle.com/docs/cd/B14099_13/portal.1014/b14135/pdg_java_adv.htm#CBBGHHDC
7.2.3.3.2 URL Parameters
"The portlet developer must ensure that the portlet:
properly qualifies its own parameters when they are built into links and forms.
leaves unchanged any parameters that do not belong to it.
The following API call transforms an unqualified parameter name into a qualified parameter name:
HttpPortletRendererUtil.portletParameter(HttpServletRequest request, String param);
HttpPortletRendererUtil is in the package oracle.portal.provider.v2.render.http.
For example:
qualParamQ = HttpPortletRendererUtil.portletParameter(r, "q");
To fetch the value of a portlet parameter from the incoming request, you can use the following API:
Note:
The API converts the parameter name into the qualified parameter name before fetching the value from the incoming request. Hence, you need not perform this step.
PortletRenderRequest.getQualifiedParameter(String name)"

Express White Paper

Thanks to all those who responded requesting the Express white paper. I
received an overwhelming response. I was expecting a dozen or so
requests - I received over 80. Apparently there is strong demand for
lessons learned about working with Express.
The paper is in-progress. Everyone that requested it will get it when
it is ready, hopefully before end of September. BTW, my paper on
Express and the Object/Relational Problem will be published by Dr.
Dobb's Journal about that time also - the publisher tells me that the
November issue will be on the newsstands by end of September. The DDJ
article is a review of the basics of Express, what it does, and how
you develop with it. It also includes our early experiences with it
(article was written end of April and reflects almost three month's
experience with Express at that time). The article also goes briefly
over our concept for a rapid process specific to Express. The white
paper will have much more to say on the topic.
Several people thanked me for my generosity in offering a free white
paper and sharing our experiences with the Forte' community. There is
nothing generous about the offer: it is unabashed self-promotion in the
finest tradition of American crass commercialism. We're a consulting
company. We sell our knowledge and experience. If, after you get the
white paper, you would like to retain us on a consulting assignment we
would be very grateful, and you will have a chance to pay us back for
our generosity. If not, maybe you can reciprocate and share your
experiences.
Now to the subject of this posting: why am I posting this now? Well,
for one thing, I received several responses that said something
like: " we've tried Express and we were disappointed with ...", or "we've
been using it and have been frustrated with ...", or "we've evaluated it
and we had difficulties with ...". I started writing reply notes to each
of the individuals who expressed those negative experiences, but when I
reviewed what I wrote, it sounded like a Dear Abby column, with the replies
sounding like: Dear Disappointed, or Dear Frustrated, or Dear With
Difficulties. I decided I'll just post one note for all those who've
had negative experiences, or who are just starting to use/evaluate Express
and are likely to have similar experiences. Hence this. I also felt that
I should give people somewhat of an overview of what's coming in the
white paper while they're waiting to get the finished product.
Perhaps initial difficulties with Express is a problem of unrealistic
expectations. I always try to remember Mick Jagger's words. Mick, as
everyone knows, is one of the great software minds of the 20th century:
"You can't always get what you want ...". You must determine if you're
getting what you need.
Seriously, I have been working on the object/relational "impedance
mismatch problem" for close to ten years now (since 1987 when I
developed an Ada/SQL binding for the US Department of Defense). I have seen
many solutions, and have developed several myself for C,C++,Ada and
for Oracle, Sybase, Informix, and Ingress. I find Express to be one
of the most elegant solutions to that thorny problem. If you look at it from
that point of view alone, it's very hard to fail to be impressed. If you're
expecting Express (or PowerBuilder 5, or any other solution) to be yet another
Silver bullet to slay the development monster then you'll be disappointed.
Software development is hard, will continue to be hard, and will continue
to get more complex. Anything that can help us eliminate or reduce what
Frederick Brooks calls "accidental complexity", and design around "essential
complexity", will help. Forte' and Express definitely do that. Paul
Butterworth's paper on "Managing the New Complexities of Application
Development", shows how Forte' has solved many of the development/deployment
problems. If you haven't read it, I highly recommend it. If you have, I would
recommend a re-read if you've forgotten why you chose Forte' to begin with, or
if you yourself did not participate in making that choice, The Express user's
manual, "Using Forte' Express", shows how Express extends Forte' to reduce
the complexity of developing RDBMS-based systems.
To get an appreciation for what Express does for you, try a simple
experiment : spec out a GUI/RDBMS application, say the order entry application
that comes with Express as a tutorial. Do it without Express. Then do it with
Express. Try to make the application as complete as possible - it must
implement all your business rules and have all the behaviors that you desire.
Relax a bit about look and feel. Also Remember to keep the experiment fair.
As part of your application development come up with a framework and an
architecture that the next application will use. Your non-Express application
also must be as extensible and modifiable as Express allows an Express
project. Record the development time of both. If you can beat Express in
development time, then you're a Forte' development Guru and people should be
beating a path to your door.
Lest anyone think I am a cheerleader for Express, I want to mention that
I have some very strong disagreements with several aspects of the
Express architecture. One major problem I find with it is conceptual.
The Express relational encapsulation has added a great deal of accidental
complexity, i.e complexity that is not inherently there because
of the nature of the problem. It arises because of design or implementation
choices. Express represents each database table with three classes (there is
actually six classes per table, three of which are just derived place holders
to contain customizations, so we'll ignore them for this discussion). For a
table EMP, Express produces three base classes: an EMPClass, an EMPQuery
class, and EMPMgr class. The EMPClass is quite understandable. It
encapsulates the table's data. The EMPMgr class is somewhat understandable,
it encapsulates operations that manage the table's data as it crosses the
interfaces. But why do we need one class per table? A manager should manage
several things, not one thing. That leads us to EMPQuery, the encapsulation
that I have most difficulty with: creating a query class for each table. That
is definitely the wrong abstraction.
If you consider that, in general, a SQL query is multi-table:
select t1.col1, t2.col2, t3.col3, ...
from t1, t2, t3, ..
where <expressions on t1.col1, t2.col2, ...>
order by <expressions on t1.col1, t2.col2, ...>
you'll see that the abstraction here is a query tree across many tables,
many columns, and a large variety of expressions - single and multi-table. To
attempt to encapsulate that in objects that are basically single table objects
will produce a great deal of accidental complexity. The design choice of one
query class per table makes writing one-table queries simple, but writing
multi-table queries awkward.
The Express architecture would be much simpler if there is a QueryTree
class for all tables. Better yet, leave the representation of queries as
text strings - ANSI or Forte' SQL on the client side, and DBMS-specific on the
server side. A great deal of complexity in doing query customizations will
be reduced. You will lose some type checking that the current design has, but
hey, you can't always get what you want. When you have several hundred tables
in your database and Express generates six classes to per table, you'll see
that the number of classes generated as excessive. When you try to design a
general query modification scheme you'll realize how awkward multi-table joins
are to do via the Express BusinessQuery class. Last week I was developing a
general design for row-level security, the query structure drove me crazy,
I ended up catching the generated SQLText and inserting the security
constraints.
Now back to the Dear Abby column: If you're unhappy because of performance
issues, try to isolate the reason for the poor performance. This is not easy
in 3-tier applications. Don't be too quick to blame the bad performance on
Express. Do you have a non-Express benchmark application that does the
same thing and outperforms Express? Don't be too quick to blame Forte'
either. Do you have a non-Forte' benchmark, that does the same things
and outperforms Forte'? The operative words here are "does the same
things". A VB application that issues a SQL Select is not a benchmark.
Forte' allows you to instrument applications to study performance
bottlenecks. Find out where your hot spots are and try to do some design
work. If the Express architecture gets in the way, it's time for feedback
to Express developers.
Performance issues, particularly in 3-tier client/server systems are
multi-faceted and complex. There are many interactions of database
issues, interaction of the database with TOOL language issues, locking,
caching, timing of asynchronous events, shared objects, distributed objects,
remote references, memory allocation/deallocation, message traffic,
copying across partitions, etc. etc. that have to be considered. There
was an interesting discussion just a few days ago on multi-threading
on the client side, and blocking in DBMS APIs. Issues like that can
keep you bogged down for days. I have worked on several performance efforts
on triage tuning teams and swat re-design teams, where several hundred man
hours were dedicated to performance and tuning of c/s systems. Big and
complex topic. What I would advice about performance is what Tom Gilb says:
"(1) don't worry about it, and (2) don't worry about it yet" - assuming of
course that you have a rational design, and a sound framework. Many sins of
design are committed in the name of performance. Anyway, enough
of the harangue about premature considerations of performance. Bottom
line is : once you get your functionality, instrument, measure, and tune. If
your architecture was sound, you won't have to re-design for performance, you
would've designed it in.
On our project the system is so large we are subsumed with rapid process
issues: how can we get this monster finished on time? without having to
expand the team to several times its size, and without having to spend more
than we can afford? The upcoming white paper's focus will be on the rapid
process. Probably at a later date, we'll do another paper on performance
issues with Express.
Another reason you may be unhappy with Express is if you perceive that
it is the wrong tool for your application - but was chosen by
corporate mandate. If your application does not involve an RDBMS (say
real-time process control), then Express is obviously not for you. It may
also appear that Express is not suitable for your application if your usage
of the RDBMS is marginal, but your application logic is quite complex (in our
case the application has many AI aspects to it, a rules-based database, and
many interconnected patterns of rules, and rich behaviors). If you find
you're spending too much time doing things outside Express, fighting
Express, or doing way too many customizations, then Express may
not have been the right choice for your application.
Don't think, however, that Express is only for those applications that
maintain relational base tables. You can use a relational database to
store tables other than base tables (state transition tables, dialog
support tables, views, and other kinds of virtual tables). To make use
of Express's powerful application generating capabilities you can use
tables created for the sole purpose of of supporting an Express
application model. The table is in essence, a state transition
diagram. The Express application model creates rows in this
virtual table while the dialog is in-progress. You can use insert and
update triggers in your SQL engine to do the real thing to your base
tables. This trick is among some I'll detail in the white paper.
Another reason some people may be unhappy with Express may be methodology
tension between those who use behavior-driven methodologies (Booch, Jacobson,
Wirfs-Brock), and those who favor data-driven methodologies (OMT, Coad). If
you're in the first camp, you'll probably feel that the modeling done via
Express is not adequate. You'd probably say "that's not an object model!
that's an ERD". You would be half right - the Express business model shows
only containment and association relationships. It does not document "uses"
relationships, so it really can't be considered a full object-model. Granted;
but once you make that realization, your reaction should be one of joy, not
sadness. This is a brilliant reduction in the amount of modeling that needs
to be done since most MIS systems are dominated by their data-model, not their
behavior model (See Arthur Riel's Design Heuristics) . Behavior-based methodologies,
with their documentation of use-cases and class behavior will tend to be analysis
overkill for most MIS projects. For some OOA/OOD practitioners, going back to a
data-centered process may be unpalatable. For those folks my advice would be to try to
look at the business model/application models as meta-models. Take the
generated classes and produce a full object model if you wish. Document your
domain classes in your favorite CASE tool. By all means document
domain-pertinent behavior and use-cases, they will help you test. But do
appreciate the productivity gain produced by the reduction of modeling load
that Express data-centered approach gives you. Your detailed
behavior-based, use-case model may be a luxury you can't afford.
If the methodology clash manifests itself politically in your
organization, where you have the OO purists pooh-pooh a data centered
approach, then you have my sympathies. My best advice is to cool it on the
methodology religion front. If you have a product to deliver, you can't
afford it. Also keep in mind that even if your modeling work is reduced by
adopting a data-centered Express process, you'll still have ample
opportunities to fully utilize your OOD expertise when it comes time to add
functionality or improve performance of the entire application as a whole.
There will still be processes where Express may not be expressive enough. Those
processes whose behavior is so rich and intricate that you cannot find a
data-based trick to model them with, you'd have to do outside Express. These
should be rare and the exception not the rule in MIS systems, however.
Does that exhaust the list of reasons of why people may be
disappointed in Express? Probably not. Undoubtedly Express reduces your
degrees of freedom, and constrains your choices, but many times "jail
liberates". More reasons? I've heard some complaints about repository
corruption problems. I'm not aware that we've had those, or that it is
something due to Express. I'll check with our Forte' system manager. If we
have, they must not have been show stoppers, and our system manager must
have dealt with them quickly enough that the developers did not notice much.
Until you get the full paper in a few weeks, I'll leave you with some
thoughts about Express, and OO development in general:
1. Learn about the concept of "Good enough" in software
engineering. Here are some sources:
- Ed Yourdon: Read Ed Yourdon's article in the last issue of Byte,
titled "When Good Enough is Best". One of Yourdon's tips in the
article: "It's the Process, Stupid!"
Don't take "good enough" to mean that development with Express
requires you to lower your expectations, or lower your
standards. You must tune the concept of "good enough" to your
acceptable standards.
- Arthur Riel: Read Arthur Riel's great book "Object-Oriented Design
Heuristics". Riel shows that there are many problems with no optimal
solutions. This is particularly true in those systems that
are not purely object oriented. Systems that interface with
non-object oriented "legacy" systems, which is what Express
is. Also, Riel's discussion of behavior-based vs data-based
methodologies is very illuminating.
2. Don't obsess about look and feel. That's where Express is most
constraining. If you have unique look and feel requirements,
and look and feel is paramount to you, save yourself some pain and
choose another tool, or sing along with Mick: you can't always get
you want ...
3. Be clear about what rapid development really means. An excellent
resource is the book by Steve McConnell of Microsoft: "Rapid
Development - Taming Wild Software Schedules". A thick book, but the
chapters on best practices, and the tens of case studies are great. The
book shows clearly the differences between evolutionary
delivery, and staged delivery. It shows the differences between
evolutionary prototyping, throwaway prototyping, user-interface
prototyping, and demonstration prototyping and the appropriate uses
and risks of each. In our white paper we advocate a life cycle
approach that is basically evolutionary prototyping, with evolutionary
delivery, and occasional use of throwaway prototypes. We don't advocate
using Express for demonstration prototyping.
4. Realize that Express is maturing along with the product you're
developing. If you don't have deep philosophicalobjections to the
Express framework and architecture, then most of
the concerns with Express would be temporary details that will be
smoothed as Express, and Forte', mature. How long did we wait for
Windows to mature? Let's be fair to the Express developers.
5. The main keys to success in Express are not rocket science (I
worry now about having hyped up people's expectations myself). The
major keys to success revolve around management issues, not
technical issues: expectations management, process management,
and customizations management.
The full paper includes the design and implementation of a Customizations
Management System that allows you to plan customizations needed and to
inventory customizations completed. It automates the process of
extracting the customizations completed from the repository and stores
them in a relational database. A customizations browser then allows
management to plan and prioritize the implementation of customizations. It
allows developers to study the completed customizations and to reuse code,
design, or concepts to implement further customizations. Managing
customizations is absolutely essential for success in Express. The paper
will also detail a rapid process that is "Express friendly".
I'm glad there was such a big response to the white paper offer. Now I have
to sit down and write it!
Nabil Hijazi Optimum Solutions, Inc.
[email protected] 201 Elden Street
Phone: (703) 435-3530 #501
Fax: (703) 435-9212 Herndon, Va 22070
================================================
You can't always get what you want.
But if you try sometime, you might find,
you get what you need. Mick Jagger.
------------------------------------------------

[email protected] wrote:
>
A few comments on Nabil Hijazi's observations...
Nabil Hijazi writes...
One major problem I find with it is conceptual.The Express relational
encapsulation has added a great deal of accidental complexity, i.e complexity
that is not inherently there because of the nature of the problem. It arises
because of design or implementation choices.
Paul Krinsky comments...
Anyone who has used NeXT's Enterprise Object Framework (EOF) will be at home
with Express's architecture, it is very similar. NeXT has been around for a
while and have gone through a lot. They originally started with DBKit to solve
the persistence problem. Basically it wrappered the database libraries. EOF was
created when it became clear that the DBKit approach wouldn't work. EOF has
EO's (Enterprise Objects), EOQuery, EOController, etc. that do pretty much what
BusinessClass, BusinessQuery and BusinessMgr do. I'm not sure if Forte hired
people with NeXT experience, but it would be interesting to find out if both
companies came up with the same architecture independently. What are the
chances?
Nabil Hijazi writes...
The design choice of one query class per table makes writing one-table queries
simple, but writing multi-table queries awkward.
Paul Krinsky comments...
I don't think BusinessQuery is too bad once you get used to it. Multi-table
queries are pretty easy if you use the foreign attributes Express provides to
build connected queries. One feature I miss from EOF is the EOFault. An EOFault
stands in for an object to reduce the overhead of retrieving everything an
object has a pointer to. For example, a retrieve on customer that contains an
array of orders would bring in EOFaults to stand in for the orders. When one of
the orders was referenced, EOF would produce a fault (hence the name) and go
and get the required record. Of course you could force EOF to bring the real
data and not use EOfaults if you wanted (if chance were high that you would
need it). This feature saved a lot of memory and increased the speed of
retrieval while still providing transparent access from the viewpoint of the
developer. Another cool feature was uniquing. EOF kept track of the EOs it
retrieved for a client. So if two windows both retrieved Customer X, EOF would
realize this and point the 2nd window at the copy already in memory. This
avoided having multiple copies of the same object in memory and allowed
provided everyone with the most current changes.
Nabil Hijazi writes...
The Express architecture would be much simpler if there is a QueryTree
class for all tables. Better yet, leave the representation of queries as text
strings - ANSI or Forte' SQL on the client side, and DBMS-specific on the
server side. A great deal of complexity in doing query customizations will be
reduced. You will lose some type checking that the current design has, but hey,
you can't always get what you want. When you have several hundred tables in
your database and Express generates six classes to per table, you'll see that
the number of classes generated as excessive. When you try to design a general
query modification scheme you'll realize how awkward multi-table joins are to
do via the Express BusinessQuery class. Last week I was developing a general
design for row-level security, the query structure drove me crazy, I ended up
catching the generated SQLText and inserting the security constraints.
Paul Krinsky comments...
I like the fact that Express manages the mapping to the database. I can change
the underlying database schema and all my queries still work. When the DBAs
inform me that I'm not following their naming standard (remove all vowels
except for 207 "standard" abbreviations that somehow got blessed then compress
to 8 characters using a bit compression algorithm that NASA would be proud of -
am I ranting?) it lets me conform without having to deal with it except in the
business model. It's nice to have a layer of abstraction.
I'm not a big fan of having all the generated classes either. I think it's a
necessary evil because of TOOL. NeXT uses Objective-C which is much more
dynamic in nature (more in common with Smalltalk than C). Their business model
can be defined on the fly and changed at runtime. It's pretty powerful but you
always have the speed vs. size tradeoff. The BusinessQuery is a nice way to
send only the what you need to the server in a format that isn't too difficult
to translate to SQL but not so close to SQL that you couldn't rip out the
backend and use the same interface to communicate with something other than a
relational database.
With any tool you have to understand it's strengths and weaknesses. Express is
a 1.0 product. Given that I think they have done a great job. The biggest
request I have is that Express moves away from being so focused on UI and
Database access and focus more on the BusinessClasses. For example, why are the
Validate and NewObject methods not on the BusinessClass? I understand their
importance in the Window classes but they should really delegate most of the
work to the BusinessClass. Otherwise you end up with most of the logic in the
UI and a 2-tier application. One of the first things we did is extend the
Window classes to delegate validation, etc. to the classes they display.Paul,
This a very good point. After reviewing all the customizations we have done on
our Express project, (BTW, I work with Nabil) I found that we have not done any
business service customizations except for database row level security. We could
have easily moved validation to the business classes. Actually, Express gives you examples
for this. They recommend customizing the insert and update methods to apply validation.
You could simply add your own validate method on the business class and have the insert,
update, or the window call it. This is actually much more object oriented than coding
validation into the window classes (for the oo purest out there!).
Robert Crisafulli
AMISYS Managed Care Solutions Inc.
(301) 838-7540
>
I look forward to reading the white paper on Express. I would encourage anyone
else to post similar documents. If anyone is interested, I can dig up some
stuff I wrote on EOF's architecture. It's a good source for enhancement
requests if nothing else! If anyone has used other persistence frameworks I
think the group would benefit from their experiences.
Paul Krinsky
Price Waterhouse LLC
Management Consulting Group

Bus error in the Forte executable

Hi,
We have an environment with forte' (ver. 3.0.G.2) running
on AIX 4.1 (The name of central server is cld_app1 and the nodemgr start
with the name cld_TDR). In our environment we are using two differnet
repository. In rep1 we have a very simple project (called 'aaa') that
use one small class with two methods. One method print the date & time.
The second method communicate with a serviceobject that use MQSeries to
put/get some messages in the queues.
The project work correctly in test run and in distribuite mode.
If we export the same project (aaa) and we import in other repository
(rep2 in the same environment) the project doesn't work. Infact,
during test run forte' return the following:
Begin Stack Backtrace
=========================================================
=
Trace caused by a bus error in the Forte executable:
ftexec Version 3.0.G.2
IBM RS6000/Aix 4.1
Forte Application Environment (tm), Forte Runtime Environment (tm),
Forte Conductor (tm):
Copyright (c) 1994-1998, Forte Software, Inc. and its licensors.
US Patent No. 5,457,797
Forte Express (tm), Forte WebEnterprise (tm):
Copyright (c) 1995-1998, Forte Software, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
Unpublished rights reserved under the copyright laws of the United
States.
Fri Mar 13 16:07:45 1998
Fault at 25-Mar-1999 10:42:53, pid '2292', node 'cld_app1':
0xd0b8886c = d0b8886c()
0xd0b88ae4 = d0b88ae4()
qqos_StkTrc: Cannot print stack trace.
Recursive stack trace detected. Exiting.
If we try to run in partitioning mode, the same error appears when
forte' "loading partition into server" with the following adding
message:
Unable to start the partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on any of nodes to wich
been assigned. See the remainder of the error stack for more
information.
In the "more" informations we have the following:
SYSTEM ERROR: Unable to start the partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on any of the
nodes to which it has been assigned. See the remainder of the error
stack for more
information.
Class: qqsp_ResourceException
Error #: [1602, 593]
Detected at: qqcf_StandardConfig::LoadRemotePartition at 5
Last TOOL statement: method overview.StartApplication
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
SYSTEM ERROR: Unable to start partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on node cld_TDR.
Class: qqsp_ErrorDescriptor
Error #: [1602, 592]
Detected at: qqcf_StandardConfig::LoadRemotePartition at 3
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
SYSTEM ERROR: Lost contact with remote server while trying to load
partition
aaa_cl0_Part1. Check server log file for more information about the
specific
problem.
Class: qqsp_ResourceException
Error #: [1301, 102]
Detected at: qqem_IPartitionAgent::Startup at 5
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: The connection to the partner was terminated by the
Communication
Manager for the reasons below.
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqdo_PartitionMgr::StopLocation at 1
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Distributed method called: qqrt_ForteExecAgentProxy.LoadPartition!6
(object name Unnamed) from partition "Forte_Executor",
(partitionId =
546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158.19]) in application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: Network partner closed connection. This usually means the
process at the other end of the wire failed. Please go look there and
find
out why.
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqcm_HoseFSM::ReceivedClose at 2
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: Error parameters for Set:0 Msg:0:
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqcm_HoseFSM::ReceivedClose at 1
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
Thanks in advance
Luz Marina e Massimiliano
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

Hi,
We have an environment with forte' (ver. 3.0.G.2) running
on AIX 4.1 (The name of central server is cld_app1 and the nodemgr start
with the name cld_TDR). In our environment we are using two differnet
repository. In rep1 we have a very simple project (called 'aaa') that
use one small class with two methods. One method print the date & time.
The second method communicate with a serviceobject that use MQSeries to
put/get some messages in the queues.
The project work correctly in test run and in distribuite mode.
If we export the same project (aaa) and we import in other repository
(rep2 in the same environment) the project doesn't work. Infact,
during test run forte' return the following:
Begin Stack Backtrace
=========================================================
=
Trace caused by a bus error in the Forte executable:
ftexec Version 3.0.G.2
IBM RS6000/Aix 4.1
Forte Application Environment (tm), Forte Runtime Environment (tm),
Forte Conductor (tm):
Copyright (c) 1994-1998, Forte Software, Inc. and its licensors.
US Patent No. 5,457,797
Forte Express (tm), Forte WebEnterprise (tm):
Copyright (c) 1995-1998, Forte Software, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.
Unpublished rights reserved under the copyright laws of the United
States.
Fri Mar 13 16:07:45 1998
Fault at 25-Mar-1999 10:42:53, pid '2292', node 'cld_app1':
0xd0b8886c = d0b8886c()
0xd0b88ae4 = d0b88ae4()
qqos_StkTrc: Cannot print stack trace.
Recursive stack trace detected. Exiting.
If we try to run in partitioning mode, the same error appears when
forte' "loading partition into server" with the following adding
message:
Unable to start the partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on any of nodes to wich
been assigned. See the remainder of the error stack for more
information.
In the "more" informations we have the following:
SYSTEM ERROR: Unable to start the partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on any of the
nodes to which it has been assigned. See the remainder of the error
stack for more
information.
Class: qqsp_ResourceException
Error #: [1602, 593]
Detected at: qqcf_StandardConfig::LoadRemotePartition at 5
Last TOOL statement: method overview.StartApplication
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
SYSTEM ERROR: Unable to start partition aaa_cl0_Part1 on node cld_TDR.
Class: qqsp_ErrorDescriptor
Error #: [1602, 592]
Detected at: qqcf_StandardConfig::LoadRemotePartition at 3
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
SYSTEM ERROR: Lost contact with remote server while trying to load
partition
aaa_cl0_Part1. Check server log file for more information about the
specific
problem.
Class: qqsp_ResourceException
Error #: [1301, 102]
Detected at: qqem_IPartitionAgent::Startup at 5
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:21
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: The connection to the partner was terminated by the
Communication
Manager for the reasons below.
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqdo_PartitionMgr::StopLocation at 1
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Distributed method called: qqrt_ForteExecAgentProxy.LoadPartition!6
(object name Unnamed) from partition "Forte_Executor",
(partitionId =
546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158.19]) in application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: Network partner closed connection. This usually means the
process at the other end of the wire failed. Please go look there and
find
out why.
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqcm_HoseFSM::ReceivedClose at 2
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
INFORMATION: Error parameters for Set:0 Msg:0:
Class: qqsp_DistAccessException
Detected at: qqcm_HoseFSM::ReceivedClose at 1
Error Time: Thu Mar 25 09:22:20
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Forte_cl0_Client",
(partitionId
= 546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1, taskId =
[546BCA70-E125-11D2-BFFF-B37364EDAA77:0x158:0x1.17]) in
application
"Forte_cl0", pid 20236 on node cld_app1 in environment
Collaudo_TDR.
Thanks in advance
Luz Marina e Massimiliano
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

FW: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE?

Hi-
You made some good points in your recent posting. I like Forte' but also
see
advantages to using other tools based on specific requirements. See my
responses
below.
From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 1996 10:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
Who is forte really for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
The main benefit of Forte' is the abilitity to develop on a particular
platform and deploy to a multi-tier environment with platforms of any
type.
Specifically I am wondering if it makes a lot of sense for
shops having all Microsoft Windows platform - both for client and
server to gain from FORTE.
IMHO, Forte' may not be the ideal solution in that kind of
environment. Although, it would work fine, there are plenty
of windows based tools and apps that would work fine and
probably faster and cleaner.
I think that there are so many easy-to-use and economical tool
which can do RAD and give decent client-server performance on
Microsoft Windows platform costing much less than a FORTE solution.
I agree. Forte' is expensive and would be overkill if you just needed
a C++ app using ODBC going against a small local database.
And with these solutions you can easily put your data server on a
Unix box and access it seamlessly on Windows platform without
any extra tools (almost all popular databases come with
this database connectivity built-in).
Correct, as long as you don't need to put business logic
on the same server as well. You add a lot of complexity
going to multi-tier but add the advantage of load balancing
and failover.
What I think is unless you have run your application (or at least
a piece of your application) on operating systems like Unix or DEC
or unless if you have different platforms in your organization to
deploy your application on, there is not much you'll gain from FORTE.
I like Forte', but I have to agree with you. In a straight Windows 95/NT
environment with a Unix database server, I'd go with something like
MS Viz C++ and MS Access or Oracle. Forte' offers a lot for the multi-
platform environment but does have a fairly steep learning curve,
especially
when it comes to the system admin piece. And initially, your system will
need a lot of hand holding till all the pieces fit. The lack of CM,object persistence,
use of their proprietary object broker etc are things that they'llneed to address
in upcoming releases to remain competitive.
Also if your application is not for a large number of users (large,
I think is 200+ user), you gain little from your investment in FORTE.
I believe that in this case you do not need a middleware, you can
have logical 3-tier (or n-tier) and deploy your application on
physical 2-tier (client and server) with more than one logical tier
running on one of the physical tier (client or server). Middleware,
I believe, is not worth the cost, effort and time unless you
absolutely need it.
Agreed, but it depends on your needs and requirements. We
at Corning, are developing some apps in Forte' and some in
C++ and are looking at object broker middleware to allow all
apps to share common objects. Our determination as to which
language/environment to use is based on many factors, some of
which you've already mentioned. Our servers are Vax OVMS, Alpha VMS,
and Alpha NT. Our clients are PCs (NT 3.51, NT4.0, W95, W3.1) and Alpha NT.
We had a couple of Macs but development and end user response was so
painfully
slow that they were replaced with far superior NT PCs (again, IMHO).
PS- You may want to check out Forte' Express before you make adecision, especially
if you are building DB apps with table editors/browsers. It is anexcellent rapid development
tool, and teamed with Select Enterprise (for round trip Development<--> Documentation)
it makes a great package._______________________________
Jeff Austin
Corning / CTE
[email protected]
http://fortefy.wilmington.net

>
Hi-
You made some good points in your recent posting. I like Forte' but
also see
advantages to using other tools based on specific requirements. See my
responses
below.
From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 1996 10:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Who is FORTE for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
Who is forte really for ? Who would benefit from FORTE ?
The main benefit of Forte' is the abilitity to develop on a particular
platform and deploy to a multi-tier environment with platforms of any
type.Specifically I am wondering if it makes a lot of sense for
shops having all Microsoft Windows platform - both for client and
server to gain from FORTE.
IMHO, Forte' may not be the ideal solution in that kind of
environment. Although, it would work fine, there are plenty
of windows based tools and apps that would work fine and
probably faster and cleaner.I think that there are so many easy-to-use and economical tool
which can do RAD and give decent client-server performance on
Microsoft Windows platform costing much less than a FORTE solution.
I agree. Forte' is expensive and would be overkill if you just needed
a C++ app using ODBC going against a small local database.And with these solutions you can easily put your data server on a
Unix box and access it seamlessly on Windows platform without
any extra tools (almost all popular databases come with
this database connectivity built-in).
Correct, as long as you don't need to put business logic
on the same server as well. You add a lot of complexity
going to multi-tier but add the advantage of load balancing
and failover.What I think is unless you have run your application (or at least
a piece of your application) on operating systems like Unix or DEC
or unless if you have different platforms in your organization to
deploy your application on, there is not much you'll gain from FORTE.
I like Forte', but I have to agree with you. In a straight Windows 95/NT
environment with a Unix database server, I'd go with something like
MS Viz C++ and MS Access or Oracle. Forte' offers a lot for the multi-
platform environment but does have a fairly steep learning curve,
especially
when it comes to the system admin piece. And initially, your system will
need a lot of hand holding till all the pieces fit. The lack of CM,
object persistence,
use of their proprietary object broker etc are things that they'll
need to address
in upcoming releases to remain competitive.Also if your application is not for a large number of users (large,
I think is 200+ user), you gain little from your investment in FORTE.
I believe that in this case you do not need a middleware, you can
have logical 3-tier (or n-tier) and deploy your application on
physical 2-tier (client and server) with more than one logical tier
running on one of the physical tier (client or server). Middleware,
I believe, is not worth the cost, effort and time unless you
absolutely need it.
Agreed, but it depends on your needs and requirements. We
at Corning, are developing some apps in Forte' and some in
C++ and are looking at object broker middleware to allow all
apps to share common objects. Our determination as to which
language/environment to use is based on many factors, some of
which you've already mentioned. Our servers are Vax OVMS, Alpha VMS,
and Alpha NT. Our clients are PCs (NT 3.51, NT4.0, W95, W3.1) and
Alpha NT.
We had a couple of Macs but development and end user response was so
painfully
slow that they were replaced with far superior NT PCs (again, IMHO).
PS- You may want to check out Forte' Express before you make a
decision, especially
if you are building DB apps with table editors/browsers. It is an
excellent rapid development
tool, and teamed with Select Enterprise (for round trip Development
<--> Documentation)
it makes a great package._______________________________
Jeff Austin
Corning / CTE
[email protected]
http://fortefy.wilmington.net

Bug Forte F

Hi to everybody,
I hope you can help me.
I was wondering if someone knows about bugs of Forte release F.
We had a client server application developed with Forte Express (client
Windows NT, server Sun Solaris) that starts at 08.00 a.m. every day.
At beginning clients connect to the server (cluster Sun) until circa
8.50 a.m. gradually, then at 9.10 a.m. they are more numerous until we
have almost 400 clients connected.
Usually between 9.00 and 9.30 a.m. the node manager crashes. I specify
that the memory setted with -fm flag is more than double of used memory
and there are no other different processes started on the server during
this period.
We don't think that it could be a problem due to the application
because, in this case, the partitions (compiled) should crash but, on
the contrary, they stay up.
Thanks anyway and happy new year,
Dr. Tesi Giovacchino
Fortè Developper
Telesoft S.p.A.

Hi to everybody,
I hope you can help me.
I was wondering if someone knows about bugs of Forte release F.
We had a client server application developed with Forte Express (client
Windows NT, server Sun Solaris) that starts at 08.00 a.m. every day.
At beginning clients connect to the server (cluster Sun) until circa
8.50 a.m. gradually, then at 9.10 a.m. they are more numerous until we
have almost 400 clients connected.
Usually between 9.00 and 9.30 a.m. the node manager crashes. I specify
that the memory setted with -fm flag is more than double of used memory
and there are no other different processes started on the server during
this period.
We don't think that it could be a problem due to the application
because, in this case, the partitions (compiled) should crash but, on
the contrary, they stay up.
Thanks anyway and happy new year,
Dr. Tesi Giovacchino
Fortè Developper
Telesoft S.p.A.

Urgent : - Unusal Express Problem

Hello All,
I am getting this unusual express problem when ever I try to
force complete generation of either an application model or a
business model in Forte Express!!!
The error is as follows!!!!
SYSTEM ERROR: Cannot find project svc.tpl in workspace.
Class: csExptnFind
Last TOOL statement: method CompileSession.SetScope
Error Time: Fri Apr 16 16:02:08
Exception occurred (locally) on partition "Express_cl9_Client",
(partitionId = 7D6A7FB0-77FD-11D2-8DE4-2E2B86F5AA77:0x11d7:0x2,
taskId =
[7D6A7FB0-77FD-11D2-8DE4-2E2B86F5AA77:0x11d7:0x2.23]) in
application
"FTLaunch_cl0", pid 206 on node MISSOURI in environment loo.
I have verified that the templates are there in the directory
$Forte\userapp\express\cl9\templates
Can anyone please help me?
Thanks in advance
Mohan
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
To unsubscribe, email '[email protected]' with
'unsubscribe forte-users' as the body of the message.
Searchable thread archive <URL:http://pinehurst.sageit.com/listarchive/>

Sessions require session cookies.
If the user has cookies off then the session won't be retained by the server automatically.
The solution to this is to use URL rewriting.
There is a method: HTTPResponse.encodeURL( String url )
It automatically adds the JSESSIONID used to track the session onto the url if the browser is not accepting cookies.
You need to do this on every link in the website so that session is maintained.
Cheers,
evnafets

Forte Express

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for