DBD::Sybase localization error for de_DE.UTF8

Dieser Post wurde aus meiner alten WordPress-Installation importiert. Sollte es Darstellungsprobleme, falsche Links oder fehlende Bilder geben, bitte einfach hier einen Kommentar hinterlassen. Danke.

.Sybase ASE is one of my preferred databases and the Express Edition is freeware (thanks, Sybase!) but using the OpenClient driver on a plain German Linux installation issues some error messages:
The context allocation routine failed when it tried to load localization files!!One or more following problems may caused the failure

Your sybase home directory is /opt/sybase. Check the environment variable SYBASE if it is not the one you want!Using locale name "de_DE.UTF-8" defined in environment variable LANGLocale name "de_DE.UTF-8" doesn't exist in your /opt/sybase/locales/locales.dat file

Setting the LANG environment variable to nothing aviods these message but there is a much easier solution:

Open your /opt/sybase/locales/locales.dat file (use $SYBASE/locales/locales.dat if you can't find it in this place), search for the [linux] section and add this one line:

    locale = de_DE.UTF-8, german, utf8
That's all. It's already configured for SunOS - but not for Linux. Maybe (hopefully) Sybase will change this in the future.



12 Kommentare. Schreib was dazu

  1. Sybase ASE is one of my preferred databases

    I have to ask - what are you smoking? The worst possible RDBMS one could be using - no sane transaction support, no sane limit support, horrible support under perl... Just look at the sheer size and amount of workarounds, compared to any other storage DBIC supports.

    For the casual reader - do yourself a favor, DO NOT USE Sybase ASE unless you are paid very very well to do it.

  2. Sebastian

    My personal RDBMS options are mySQL (loosing data, many "do not use" features, unstable, many other problems, no real option) or Postgres. I don't have (and don't want) any Windows Server and MS SQL is pretty near to Sybase ASE because MS bought the source some years ago. I never tried Oracle, because it's really huge, very expensive (and I don't like their politics regarding OpenSource). Postgres is the last option, it's much easier to install but Sybase Central is better than PgAdmin.
    ASE is compilicated to install but very easy to run and very, very stable. Most crashes are repaired automatically. Postgres has a really huge upgrade problem and - my biggest con - you can't copy database files to rescue data from one server to another expecially after the first one crashed badly.
    I switched to MongoDB lately which is not a RDBMS but very good solution - if you don't try to use it as an RDBMS, because it isn't one. RDBMS require their users to use a special data structure and NoSQL is the same - except that the required structure (heavily) differs from RDBMS.

  3. [Imported from blog]

  4. [Imported from blog]

  5. [Imported from blog]

  6. [Imported from blog]

  7. Actually you have a lot of misconceptions in your worldview. I do not claim to be an expert in all fields, but I know what I maintain ;)

    MySQL starting from 5.1 onwards is a perfectly reasonable database. All you need to do is execute these statements on connect and it is indistinguishable from anything else. An extra data point is that while I have *completely* free choice in what RDBMS to use in my $work, MySQL is *my own* RDBMS of choice and that is unlikely to change in the foreseable future.

    MSSQL is *radically* different from Sybase. For more advanced features (like e.g. pagination and concurrent open cursors) Microsoft SQL Server is lightyears ahead of Sybase. It is on par with Oracle for all intents and purposes.

    Oracle is fine as a RDBMS, but the server implementation is a notorious resource hog. This may or may not matter in your case.

    Postgres is fine as a RDBMS. Its *perl side support* however is arguably the worst of all DBDs we have. Make out of this what you will.

    I do not have an opinion on NoSQL solutions, because I have 0 experience with these. I have not yet come across a situation where I need "dumb data store" without having to do aggregation queries.

    Hope this helps!

  8. [Imported from blog]

  9. [Imported from blog]

  10. Sebastian

    Actually, I have two world views: One for my own (small) projects - most DBs fit here and low maintenance time is my highest prio - and the other one for $work where mySQL is having problems real DB's don't have (but usually server-side, very few in DBI/DBD::mysql), but we can't switch to anything else for various reasons. This might differ from your worldview, but thats ok for me.

    NoSQL is much more than a "dump data storage", MapReduce does a lot more than all complex SQL queries. You can't copy a RDBMS structure to NoSQL and it's hard for SQL guys to start "thinking NoSQL" - but once you did, it's wonderful - but still no "one-fits-perfectly-everywhere" solution. SQL/RDBMS also isn't one.

  11. [Imported from blog]

  12. [Imported from blog]

Schreib was dazu

Die folgenden HTML-Tags sind erlaubt:<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>