OpenOffice.org Forum at OOoForum.orgThe OpenOffice.org Forum
 
 [Home]   [FAQ]   [Search]   [Memberlist]   [Usergroups]   [Register
 [Profile]   [Log in to check your private messages]   [Log in

Choice between Postgresql & HSQLDB as backend ?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    OOoForum.org Forum Index -> OpenOffice.org Base
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 7:55 am    Post subject: Choice between Postgresql & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

Hi, I am a potential new user of 'Base'

I read 'Base' is intended as a frontend to many RDBMS, eg postgresql, BUT has the HSQLDB 'built-in'. A brief comparison of the postgresql and hsqldb manuals ("PostgreSQL 9.1.3 Documentation", and "HyperSQL User Guide V2.2" PDFs) led me to think postgresql was the superior rdbms of the two; BUT being now quite rusty on using rdbms, am nervous about selecting postgres as the rdbms against the built-in hsqldb - presumably HSQLDB is the default for a reason ?

I would prefer to read a more considered comparison between using the two, before choosing which to work with. Is there any info on this ?

My system is a rather light 'Nettop' using 1.6GHz dualcore Atom330 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM, 1920x1080 monitor, running Win7 32bit. My Apps, are single-user, and small in size - but I use FORMS having multiple subforms, many listboxes, comboboxes, to make dataentry/selection easy. Is there any uptodate info on whether postgresql will run satisfactorily on this system ?
(clearly HSQLDB, being a smaller RDBMS should run a lot faster than postgresql, but I am worried about the many limitations on its datatypes (due to Java acc. to the manual), eg date-time, timestamp, working with tz). Thank you for any help in advance
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 8:41 am    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

paul22 wrote:
A brief comparison of the postgresql and hsqldb...
I would prefer to read a more considered comparison between using the two, before choosing which to work with. Is there any info on this ?

See: Database Engines relative to Base

paul22 wrote:
HSQLDB...datatypes (due to Java acc. to the manual), eg date-time, timestamp, working with tz)

Not normally an issue. If you're specifically referring to the limitation of Timestamps with regard to Timezone encoding, then it appears that HSQLDB has a setting to workaround the JDBC specification/limitation. "You can use the URL property hsqldb.translate_dti_types=false to override the default behaviour."
See: Data Types

BTW, when you refer to the "built-in" HSQLDB it's an older version (1.8 ). The documentation you cited refers to HSQLDB 2.x which is the latest version of the engine.
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:58 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

dacm wrote:
paul22 wrote:
A brief comparison of the postgresql and hsqldb...
I would prefer to read a more considered comparison between using the two, before choosing which to work with. Is there any info on this ?

See: Database Engines relative to Base

paul22 wrote:
HSQLDB...datatypes (due to Java acc. to the manual), eg date-time, timestamp, working with tz)

Not normally an issue. If you're specifically referring to the limitation of Timestamps with regard to Timezone encoding, then it appears that HSQLDB has a setting to workaround the JDBC specification/limitation. "You can use the URL property hsqldb.translate_dti_types=false to override the default behaviour."
See: Data Types

BTW, when you refer to the "built-in" HSQLDB it's an older version (1.8 ). The documentation you cited refers to HSQLDB 2.x which is the latest version of the engine.


RPG mentioned that link, which I replied to before seeing your post, saying: I had stumbled across it it a few days back. It gives a good compact summary of the features of alternatives, (from which I had ruled out MySQL, Firebird, SQLite), but doesn't make much comparison between HSQLDB & postgresql on a broad level, making only the comment "But then again, these full-scale RDBMS's may not be as well-suited for small-to-medium size projects in a home, office or small-business where the superior-speed, small-footprint, ease-of-use, and Java-portability of HSQLDB or H2 remain favorable." & under the postgresql entry: " difficult to compete with the speed of an embedded database (HSQLDB / H2 / SQLite) due to connection overhead" - But other posts already state its dangerous to use HSQLDB in Embedded mode - so running HSQLDB in Client-Server mode, I assume this comment has no meaning as "connection overhead" is common to both ? DACM says postgresql community support less than MySQL - but doesnt compare with HSQLDB

Assuming the need to operate Base in Client-Server mode for reliability, and given my hardware platform is a little weak, but my Apps are quite small, are you able to offer any further comparisons in deciding whether to use the default HSQLDB, or postgresql as backend - bearing in mind Base community support for either case ?


Yes, you are referring to 2 references I saw on limitations of the JDBC on date-time in the User Manual V2.2. Are you saying using that setting fixes the problem ?
There was another area I noticed postgresql seemed to handle date-time better.. but cant quite remember which doc it was, may have been a wikipedia page. It compared the range of max and min data values for most datatypes, between different rbdms. I noted postgres handles dates from 4713BC to far into the future through use of Juiandate internally (confirmed in the postgresql manual 8.5.6), while I seem to recall HSQLDB stops at 1AD, with no reference to use of JD. I think it was one of my Access2 Apps that held records of historic events, where I coded Juliandate to/from functions, due to the rdbms being limited to a small date range. I cannot find any statement on this in the HSQLDB User Manual v2.2.

Your mention of built-in HSQLDB V1.8 versus the latest v2.2. Not sure I follow. Does the current download of OO use V1.8 or 2.2 ? Also, if one does elect to use postgresql - can one dispense with the HSQLDB part of the install ?

Many thanks for you help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 3:44 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

I think you'll have to test these things or simply trust your research.

Are you serious about time-zone distinctions in your time-stamps? Timezone encoding in Timestamps is a multi-user consideration where time-zones would otherwise effect time-stamping. Since you can't be two places at once, and time-zones didn't apply in 1AD, it's probably not an issue for you with or without the workaround setting.

Otherwise, if you're dealing with ancient dates, it's likely that 'years' are the primary focus as you've indicated. Years do not require a Date data type. The data encoded with a full Date field (and certainly timestamps that record sub-second distinctions) are not generally applicable with data before 1AD. So I would just conform an Integer field to the calendar convention of your choice. An Integer data type would limit you to a 4 billion year span from -2 billion to +2 billion (...no comment Wink). You could add another Integer field for month as needed for intra-year distinctions and sorts, and perhaps the same for days, but specialized SQL date-math functions would not be applicable to these homemade conventions.
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2012 3:56 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

paul22 wrote:
Does the current download of OO use V1.8 or 2.2 ?

V1.8

paul22 wrote:
Also, if one does elect to use postgresql - can one dispense with the HSQLDB part of the install ?

No, but feel free to track down the little 685 KB file (hsqldb.jar) in your OOo/LibO installation and eliminate it. That will also disable "embedded database" support. But I have to say that if disk space is that tight, you'll never fit PostgreSQL on your system. It's over 3,000 files and 200 folders topping 130 MB for the portable version (8.3.7-1 32-bit version).
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

dacm wrote:
I think you'll have to test these things or simply trust your research.

Are you serious about time-zone distinctions in your time-stamps? Timezone encoding in Timestamps is a multi-user consideration where time-zones would otherwise effect time-stamping. Since you can't be two places at once, and time-zones didn't apply in 1AD, it's probably not an issue for you with or without the workaround setting.

Otherwise, if you're dealing with ancient dates, it's likely that 'years' are the primary focus as you've indicated. Years do not require a Date data type. The data encoded with a full Date field (and certainly timestamps that record sub-second distinctions) are not generally applicable with data before 1AD. So I would just conform an Integer field to the calendar convention of your choice. An Integer data type would limit you to a 4 billion year span from -2 billion to +2 billion (...no comment Wink). You could add another Integer field for month as needed for intra-year distinctions and sorts, and perhaps the same for days, but specialized SQL date-math functions would not be applicable to these homemade conventions.

Thank you for that.

1) Its just that if a programming language has a feature, eg the Date&Time datatypes, I would rather use the inbuilt datatype for ALL date-time calulations, than discover its inadequate and have to build my own system for handling dates - which is what I had to do many years ago, when I held all my Date-times as a single JD number - JD year to left of a large float, fraction of the day (hours, min, sec converted to/from fraction of 24hours). That was a long time ago, so I hope a more modern system can cover ALL conceivable dates, including tz, which the postgresql manual states in sufficient detail, that it can. For a db of historical global events, I prefer a datatype with sufficient precision to hold the date-time with accuracy to cover all events, often down to the second for recent events, even though, as you say, much reduced precision for ancient events. Having created my own JD datatype, I seem to recall just entering trailing zeros in cases of unknown hours, min. sec, as self-evidencing reduced precision. BTW, it WAS the wikipedia site that supplied the specification on Max/Min values of 'Base' datatypes: [url]wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_relational_database_management_systems#Limits[/url]
I could not find that basic fundamental data on openoffice.org or libreoffice

However, a good Date-Time datatype, althought important for me, is just 1 aspect of choosing a rdbms. In reading some of your other posts, it does sound as if HSQLDB will run a lot better than postgresql on a small system such as I have, and I think you are also saying [the all important] BASE community support is much stronger for Base+HSQLDB than for Base+postgresql ? For that reason, I think I should try HSQL.

2) So my next query now, given our exchange on Client/Server mode being 100% datareliable (or the best their is), is how to make the best install under Win7 32bit. Given your advice the HSQLDB included with the current Base download is V1.8, and many sources say v2.2 is far superior, can you confirm that in my single machine dual-core Atom330 1.6GHz, 2GB RAM Win7 32bit system, that a Base front-end, HSQL V2.2 server mode is optimim, and point me to a clear install procedure to achieve this ? In my googling on which rdbms, seem to recall coming across a post recommending creation of a .BAT desktop icon, that fires up the server, then the Base front-end, to make a seamless Open operation.

3) I seek an easy Reference Manual for Base FORMS, to compare the FORMS features between Base and Access97. RGB said he knew of no FORMS Reference Manual for Base. Do you know of one ?

4) Relating to the last query, do you know if Base now has a) an inbuilt 'Switchboard' feature, like in Access2, or is it still an 'Addon', and b) like in Access2, a means of exporting a graphic, depicting the relations between tables ?

BTW, on my small system, have huge external USB disk-space, but think the small 2GB RAM & weak CPU is a limiting factor. Ref. backup: I have always found that a difficult area and appreciate your recommendation to use 'cloud' backup. However, I have much data, and not always regular, or fast internet, so prefer all my systems to function in absence of internet. I currently use a pair of 1TB WD Passports for manual adhoc backups... far from ideal, but its a laptop type system, doesnt run 24/7.

Again, many thanks for your help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

1) The wiki you cited is not necessarily accurate. It's a good start but be sure to check the official documentation for specific limitations for each RDBMS.

2) If you go with HSQLDB 2.x, follow the links in my signature below for setup with Base.

    Yes, you can use the included Windows batch files to manage 'server-mode' seamlessly with Base. But considering your Atom 330 proc, you'll likely benefit from the superior speed of running in 'file mode.' Then, if you ever want to switch between modes, it takes about a minute to copy&paste the 'server mode' data-source URL (or vice versa) into your .odb file running in Base. But don't choose 'server mode' for its theoretical-edge in reliability over 'file mode.' The seamless access and superior speed of 'file mode' in single-user environments out-weighs the fractional reliability improvement. Automated, multi-version backups are key to reliability...
    Apache Derby, HSQLDB, H2 corruption -- with advice from database authors Thomas Mueller and Fred Toussi
    MySQL corruption: 1000+ results
    PostgreSQL corruption example

    Once you leave the Base "embedded database" configuration behind, you're not likely to see a back-end database corruption in your lifetime. But backups are good insurance and they serve multiple purposes (lost/stolen laptop). HSQLDB 2.2.8 just added a hot-backup option, but the real answer is automated versioning. Cloud services are only one option; on-board software is another. Here's a list of free software with the versioning feature that doesn't require an internet connection. See: Without an internet connection. So you can automate your backups to both the internal drive, and to a USB drive, as available, for free...no excuses.

3) There's no official Forms reference manual that I'm aware of. Perhaps check-out:

4) See [Tutorial] Standalone Forms / Switchboard.
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 7:19 am    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

dacm wrote:

2) If you go with HSQLDB 2.x, follow the links in my signature below for setup with Base.

[list]Yes, you can use the included Windows batch files to manage 'server-mode' seamlessly with Base. But considering your Atom 330 proc, you'll likely benefit from the superior speed of running in 'file mode.' Then, if you ever want to switch between modes, it takes about a minute to copy&paste the 'server mode' data-source URL (or vice versa) into your .odb file running in Base. But don't choose 'server mode' for its theoretical-edge in reliability over 'file mode.' The seamless access and superior speed of 'file mode' in single-user environments out-weighs the fractional reliability improvement.
.


Many thanks for your helpful lists of references.

With so many years having passed since I last designed a database, I am now spending some time re-learning how to design a database.

I think I will start afresh on a new project: a db to hold all info on my collection of MOVIES. Of course many off the peg designs exist, but as usual, they don't offer the exact set of features one seeks.

One field in my DB will hold the PATH to the actual Movie, stored on any number of hard drives, plus a Path to a backup of the Movie.

Although not essential, I would like to be able to click a Button on the retrieval Form, to actually Play the Movie - if the Path - normally via USB, is connected, using my favourite Film Player, VLC, then once done, to hand back to the DB UI. Do you know if this is an easy thing to do ?

Accepting your recommendation to install HSQLDB2.2 using Base in 'File-Mode', I looked in your 'signature links' saw much about MultiMode but could not see a clear Windows 'HSQLDB V2.2 Install Procedure for use in FileMode'

I searched around in HSQLDB.org for a Windows Install section without success. It all seemed to be linux oriented - which I am unfamiliar with. I would be grateful if you can point me to a clear Install Guide for the Windows platform.

Would I be right in thinking 'install HSQLDB2.2 using Base in 'File-Mode'' is a 2 step process: 1) install HSQLDB in Windows, 2) From within 'Base', in 'Settings', setup a 'file mode' configuration ?

Do the install instructions apply equally to the Libre version of 'Base' ?

Thankyou again for your help.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Sun Apr 08, 2012 7:12 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

paul22 wrote:
HSQLDB 2.x Install Guide for the Windows platform...

See the pair of automated installers under the heading at the following link:


paul22 wrote:
Do the install instructions apply equally to the Libre version of 'Base' ?

With LibO you'll need to use the 'browse' button to locate the 'C:\Program Files (x86)\LibreOffice 3.x' installation folder while on the Target Path screen of the hsqldb2_OOo.exe installer.

The path to LibO also requires some tweaking of the 'server mode' batch files (server.start.bat and server.stop.bat). Or, since you're primarily interested in 'file mode' perhaps un-check the "Create a new 'server mode' database" option while running the hsqldb2_mydb.exe installer to avoid the path issue.


paul22 wrote:
One field in my DB will hold the PATH to the actual Movie, stored on any number of hard drives, plus a Path to a backup of the Movie...I would like to be able to click a Button on the retrieval Form, to actually Play the Movie...is an easy thing to do ?

That's not an 'easy' thing to do because it involves a macro. Perhaps read:
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?p=25810#p25810
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

dacm wrote:
paul22 wrote:
HSQLDB 2.x Install Guide for the Windows platform...

See the pair of automated installers under the heading at the following link:

tweaking of the 'server mode' batch files (server.start.bat and server.stop.bat). Or, since you're primarily interested in 'file mode' perhaps un-check the "Create a new 'server mode' database" option while running the hsqldb2_mydb.exe installer to avoid the path issue.

Prior to my last post I had downloaded a file called hsqldb-2.2.8.zip of size 6.99MB and unzipped into a folder - but couldn't work out how to install it, hence my last post. Are you saying I should not try installing anything from that zip file, and just execute the 2 files you list above ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Villeroy
Super User
Super User


Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 10106
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HSQL does not require any installation. In order to use it with your office suite call Tools>Options>Java and add <extract_path>/lib/hsqldb.jar to the class path.
_________________
Rest in peace, oooforum.org
Get help on https://forum.openoffice.org
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Choice between PostgreSQL & HSQLDB as backend ? Reply with quote

paul22 wrote:
... just execute the 2 files you list above ?

Yes.

The first executable effectively performs the steps Villeroy outlined, but only the necessary files (1.55 MB) are installed with this executable.

The second executable provides pre-configured Base front-end files, that are otherwise non-trivial to setup. If you use Villeroy's method, the 'server mode' batch files will require additional modification. But just start with 'file mode' using mydb.file.odb.

After installation of both executables above, look in your user folder (C:\Users\~\Databases\mydb\ ) and click on mydb.file.odb to open it in Base. Then clicking the Tables icon in Base actually creates the HSQLDB 2.x database in the same 'mydb' folder.
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Villeroy wrote:
HSQL does not require any installation. In order to use it with your office suite call Tools>Options>Java and add <extract_path>/lib/hsqldb.jar to the class path.

Thanks for your quick reply. Not sure I understand. I have just recently installed LibreOffice onto my Windows7 machine. I searched the whole of C:\ for the hsqldb.jar you refer to. Found 2 locatiions:
C:\MYREVO-INSTALL-W7\SYS-APPS-SRC\DBMS\HSQLDB\hsqldb-2.2.8\hsqldb.jar 1.33mb Date 22/1/12
C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3.4\Basis\program\classes\hsqldb.jar 684KB date 3/1/12
C:\Program Files\JDownloader\libs\hsqldb.jar 690KB 21/10/10

I guess its the 2nd entry you are refering to ? (I read JD is Java App, but I never needed to know Java to use it)

I opened LibreOffice and under Tools>Options.Java, I see a small pane with a ticked 'Use Java runtime environment', JRE installed, a listbox containing 1 row 'Sun Micro.. Version 1.6.0.17', and 3 buttons labelled 'Add', 'Parameters', 'Class Path'. (also a Help button - but its internet help, and this pc has no internet)
I am guessing you mean I should click the 'Class Path' button ? I did this, then clicked 'Add Archive', browsed to the 2nd entry above, then clicked OK. I observe this has not added an entry in the listbox.

Is this what you were instructing me to do ?

If so, to avoid using the embedded v1.8 engine, and have LibreOffice use the HSQL 2.2.8, should I now execute the 2 files & instructions in DACM's last post ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dacm
Super User
Super User


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 769

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Note we cross-posted above.

paul22 wrote:

C:\MYREVO-INSTALL-W7\SYS-APPS-SRC\DBMS\HSQLDB\hsqldb-2.2.8\hsqldb.jar 1.33mb Date 22/1/12
C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3.4\Basis\program\classes\hsqldb.jar 684KB date 3/1/12
C:\Program Files\JDownloader\libs\hsqldb.jar 690KB 21/10/10

...to avoid using the embedded v1.8 engine, and have LibreOffice use the HSQL 2.2.8, should I now execute the 2 files & instructions in DACM's last post ?

Actually it would be the first entry above (1.33 MB). The use of HSQLDB 2.x disables HSQLDB 1.8. If you now use the 2 installers referenced above, then you'll have to delete your Class-Path entry in LibO, because these Class Path settings override the method used by the installer.
_________________
Soli Deo gloria
Tutorial: avoiding data loss with Base + Splitting 'Embedded databases'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
paul22
General User
General User


Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dacm wrote:
Note we cross-posted above.

paul22 wrote:

C:\MYREVO-INSTALL-W7\SYS-APPS-SRC\DBMS\HSQLDB\hsqldb-2.2.8\hsqldb.jar 1.33mb Date 22/1/12
C:\Program Files\LibreOffice 3.4\Basis\program\classes\hsqldb.jar 684KB date 3/1/12
C:\Program Files\JDownloader\libs\hsqldb.jar 690KB 21/10/10

...to avoid using the embedded v1.8 engine, and have LibreOffice use the HSQL 2.2.8, should I now execute the 2 files & instructions in DACM's last post ?

Actually it would be the first entry above (1.33 MB). The use of HSQLDB 2.x disables HSQLDB 1.8. If you now use the 2 installers referenced above, then you'll have to delete your Class-Path entry in LibO, because these Class Path settings override the method used by the installer.

So in LO Tools>Java>Class Path, I should Delete my erronious selection, instead add a path to the 1.33MB .jar, THEN run the instructions in YOUR previous post, THEN back to LO Tools>Java>Class Path, & Delete the new Class Path to avoid it overriding the method used by the installer ? I have just noticed that LO has 1 registered DB called Biblio - which I guess is there as a training aid. I guess that will be a V1.8 ver DB. In case I want to use it for learning, I think I should like to keep the original V1.8 in case I ever need to use the embedded V1.8 engine, but make a copy, called say Biblio2, for use with the V2.2.8 engine. Presumably, I will need to 'unregister' the original, then 'Register' the Biblio2 and convert it to v2 db format ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    OOoForum.org Forum Index -> OpenOffice.org Base All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group