Coming from a VFP and VPME background, I am wondering what is the best practice for applications that use SQL Databases.  In VFP applications I normally use Views for Forms and Reports and separate them into two or more databases.  Also, I would try to use Views instead of Filters most of the time.  Is the way I would do it in VFP still the best way for SQL database applications?

- Is it best to separate tables and views into separate databases?  I noticed the Strataflix and Strataframe samples both show views and tables together in the same DB but this may be just for simplification

- Should Maintenance Forms be based on views or tables?

- Should Reports use views or tables?

- When is it best to use a View as opposed to a table or a table with a filter?

- Also, I plan to develop applications using SF that I want to be able to sell just parts of as well as the entire application as a whole.  For example, I'm working on a Safety Review application that could be sold as a complete package or someone might just want to purchase the OSHA package, ADA package, Driver/Employee File package, Vehicle Inspections package, etc.  I might also have a Lite/Express version too for example.

- I'd be interested how others are doing it and what make the most sense in terms of flexibility, especially since I have the opportunity to start from "scratch" so to speak.

Thanks!

Russ Brown (Using C#2010/SQL Server 2008)

I still have to use (but not for much longer ) VPME and xCase2VPM and I will not miss either. I will certainly not miss the quirks or the extremely tedious view generation process that takes forever to run for a simple change Or the massive list of views which contain many more fields than I actually want to query or the generation of "SELECT *" type statements which causes VFP to throw an error when the field order changes.....

To be honest, I was worried initially about SF as you code your own queries and I assumed this would be hard work. However, after using SF, it is a MUCH better approach and is extremely easy to do. Now the SF version of my VPME application is only quering the fields I need rather than some expanded list of fields created in a view generator.

I have been using SF every day now for months and I haven't found anything yet to grumble about I am really angry with myself for not finding it years ago but I am determined to find something wrong with it so I can grumble However, I suspect it will be a spelling mistake somewhere rather than a design flaw.

The best advice I can give anyone coming from a VPME background to SF is to totally forget about VPME and views. SF is in a different league and comparisions are pointless.

Just my 18 cents worth (sorry inflation).