Bug 97330 - Enable support for portable split databases in Base
Summary: Enable support for portable split databases in Base
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Base (show other bugs)
(earliest affected)
Inherited From OOo
Hardware: All All
: medium enhancement
Assignee: Not Assigned
Depends on:
Blocks: Database-Import
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2016-01-22 23:24 UTC by Roberto
Modified: 2017-11-02 23:14 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:
Regression By:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Roberto 2016-01-22 23:24:56 UTC
Hi, everybody.

Regarding embedded databases in Base, there is some strong advices against using them when creating a new database for critical-data management, because it seems to be prone to generate data loss (see the references below).

(1) https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/FAQ_%28Base%29#So_why_should_I_avoid_.27embedded_databases.27.3F

(2) http://en.libreofficeforum.org/node/7876#comment-31708

(3) https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?p=162653#p162653

Considering this, maybe the 'New Database' wizard should provide an option to let the user choose between an 'embedded' or a 'split' database. Probably, selecting the last option would not lead to the creation of a single database file (.odb), but a folder containing all the necessary files to work with the database, and to make it portable as an .odb file actually is.

Some documentation about how to afford it from the user side can be found here (maybe something here can illustrate how to afford it from the developer side):

(4) https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=61183

(5) https://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?p=162653#p162653

Unfortunately, this 'workarounds' have some limitations with the current LibreOffice version. Specifically, as you can read in (4), the table designer is unable to modify fields properties after the fields has been created. Additionally, there are some problems when you try to set default field values for several data types. 

Finally, this enhancement request is probably related to bug 61972.

Kind regards.
Comment 1 Alex Thurgood 2016-06-03 09:59:30 UTC
Confirming as RFE