开云体育

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 开云体育
  1. N3FJPSoftwareUsers
  2. Topics

Total number of records in AC Log

 

I have an average PC with regard to speed. Is there an upper limit of records you keep in AC Log before you consider archiving? older contacts?
Bill - W3PNM
 

开云体育

My PC is pretty average and I have 273,418 contacts in ACLog. If I re-index (like after deleting a record) ?it takes a bit to do but other than that it’s fine.

?

73, Gary K7FR

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Bill DeVore via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2025 12:50
To: [email protected]
Subject: [N3FJPSoftwareUsers] Total number of records in AC Log

?

I have an average PC with regard to speed. Is there an upper limit of records you keep in AC Log before you consider archiving? older contacts?

Bill - W3PNM
 

Hi Bill,

Thanks for your e-mail.? AC Log will work fine on modern PCs with large databases.? We have users with over 300K records.? I have over 110K myself.

Enjoy!

73, Scott
N3FJP


Serving the Amateur Radio community with contesting and general logging software since 1997.

1 Peter 3 vs 15: Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give . But do this with gentleness and respect...


On Sunday, January 12, 2025 at 03:50:33 PM EST, Bill DeVore via groups.io <maxrcul@...> wrote:


I have an average PC with regard to speed. Is there an upper limit of records you keep in AC Log before you consider archiving? older contacts?
Bill - W3PNM
 

I only have 50K contacts working fine on an older Intel !5 processor running Win 10.
?
It would be nice if the re-indexing function worked faster - or better said, "a bit smarter".?
In almost all cases, I've screwed up the most recent contact entry, and simply need to delete it.? Unfortunately, that delete of the most recent record still requires a re-scan of the entire database.? Would be nice if deleting the newest record and backing up the index number was faster.? Anyway, just a thought.
 

Fred,

I'll help Scott out on this one.? Re-indexing a database is a time consuming process, depending on the number of records in a table.? Most databases have a field , or column called Record Number, PKEY, or some other? title to represent the consecutive record number in the table.? It is that number that is used to identify an individual record.? In most cases, this is an automatically incremented field when a new record is inserted into the table.

Deleting or removing an individual record from a table is quite simple and takes just a matter of a few nanoseconds.? But it leaves a gap in the record number sequence.? Lets assume you delete record #3 from a table of 50,000 records.? That sequence in now 1,2,4,5....

For all practical purposes, that is really not a big deal from? the user stand point other than you have that sequential record number gap in the Rec# column.? Reindxing will fix that gap problem.

The process to do that involves copying every record in the table, into a new table (in memory or a temporary file), then truncating the in-use table of all records, then coping all the records from the temp table back into the in-use table.? That is a time consuming process and not much you can do about it.

I'm not sure how Scott and company are doing that as there re a number of ways to accomplish that so, he might be able to get into the technical aspect of how AC log does it with MS Access.

Jeff K. Steinkamp (N7YG)
Tucson, AZ
Scud Missile Coordinates
N32.2319 W110.8477


------ Original Message ------
From "Fred, W9KEY via groups.io" <fred.schwierske@...>
Date 1/13/2025 14:09:05
Subject Re: [N3FJPSoftwareUsers] Total number of records in AC Log

I only have 50K contacts working fine on an older Intel !5 processor running Win 10.
?
It would be nice if the re-indexing function worked faster - or better said, "a bit smarter".?
In almost all cases, I've screwed up the most recent contact entry, and simply need to delete it.? Unfortunately, that delete of the most recent record still requires a re-scan of the entire database.? Would be nice if deleting the newest record and backing up the index number was faster.? Anyway, just a thought.
 

Outstanding! Once again this group has helped explained on of my questions.
 

Thanks Jeff,
Not a programmer or DB expert, but I understand the basic process.
My comment was related to deleting (for example) record number 49675 in a database consisting of 49675 records.
ACLog still takes a LONG time to simply delete that most recent record and decrement the index number by one.
?
Of course I realize it has to be more complicated if deleting a record in the middle, but as noted in my post - most of the time I simply need to delete the most recent entry because it was incorrectly entered as a duplicate.? Anyway, doesn't happen too often.
73 ..... Fred,? W9KEY

1 - 7 of 7