Talk:Flat-file database

message: Someone went ahead and merged "flat file" with "flat file database", which I suppose is a step toward the greater good, but:
a flat file database is not always a single file database. a single file, flat file database is a special type of flat file database.
pmwiki is a flatfile database wiki, for example. it uses one page per wiki entry, and sorts the entries using file names in the filesystem
tiddlywiki, on the other hand, is a flatfile database wiki, that holds everything in one file. sorting is accomplished by tag and location in the file's structure.
-maxnort96.245.14.103 (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: As I recall the word "flat" in "flat file" was used to contrast with hierarchical data stores.  That contrast may have seemed dated for a while, but now seems relevant again as data stores with more hierarchical or graph-like structures have regained popularity. Ericfluger (talk) 20:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  definition inaccurate now 

message: Why the hyphen in the noun? Deb 18:19, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hyphen (removed) 

message: One improvement of flat file databases was repeatable fields. Around 1970, some DBMS included "repeatable fields".  In a bibliographic application, multiple subject headings may be needed to describe a document.  Before repeatable fields, the designer would have to establish as many separate subject-heading fields as the maximum number expected to be needed. Many of these fixed-length fields would be unused in most of the records, thereby wasting storage space. Repeatable fields minimized such waste. Also, Boolean logic could be used to query/search flat file databases. Before the advent of relational DBMS, many bibliographic databases were flat file databases.  Should this be mentioned in this article?  AnonUser 02:02, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeatable fields, and Boolean logic 

message: I'm going to go ahead and be bold. Excel is not a flat-file database, so Excel examples do not belong. FileMaker bills itself as a fully-fledged database tool, so it's not a flat-file database either. They might be able to import/export to a flat format, but this is not native to them. The article, as it was, read like an advertisment for FileMaker, providing instructions on how to use it and how to make it look a bit like a flat file database. --Sam Pointon 17:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My rationale

message: Recommend merging the article Flat file with this one.  What do you think?  Thanks. SqlPac 04:26, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Flat file]] 

message: Flat File Database is a collection of flat files.
A Flat File may or may not be (part of) a database.
The "Flat File Database" article should remain separate from the "Flat File" article because people looking for information about flat files may or may not want all the information about databases ---
But I do believe the articles should reference/link to one another.
My considered opinion. Please be kind, this is my first submission into Wikipedia.org.
Marion 18:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flat File and Flat File Database Topics should be kept separate 

message: I'm not sure that the blurb under the first graphic on the page actually makes any sense - it gives "one of several typical uses for a flat file database" as being convertible to a fully-fledged relational database.
Firstly, this doesn't really make sense as a use in of itself. Moreover, "converting to" might be less representative of real usage than "converting into a format importable into" (or whatever)?
Rswarbrick (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The last part is now gone, reasonable way to address the issues here; it would seem.  dr.ef.tymac (talk) 03:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphic Comment 

message: I would like to discuss adding two paragraphs on the origination of the term "flat file".
The term flat file was coined in 1971 on the campus of Modesto Junior College by the founder of the computer club.  At that time data sets were described in the same way that they were stored in a computer on magnetic rings, i.e.  two dimensional array or three dimensional array.  The coiner decided that a shorter term with fewer syllables may get accepted as a substitute.  The term flat file was decided upon because it had a physical image and because comic research found that people enjoy hearing and saying words with “f” sounds and “p’ sounds (think of all the four letter words that start with either of these two letters).  The new term was disseminated using the phrase” … flat file, you know, a two dimensional array.”
A transfer to UC Berkeley along with membership to the campus computer club spread the term on that campus during 1971 – 1975.  Later a position with the Fireman’s Insurance Company, which trained a high percentage of the SF Bay Area COBOL programmers, helped spread the term throughout the local region.    
Please feel free to edit/change/correct as necessary.David E. Mould (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything in the article should be supportable by a reliable source, so if all you have is opinion or first-hand experience, then it shouldn't be included. As Adrian Willenbücher pointed you to above, you should read WP:Verifiability and WP:No original research for explanations of why we have those requirements. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coinage 

message: Flat file databases are used (historically) for sequential processing of textual data records, large amounts of data,
with perhaps large records.  The weakness of Flat file databases is the lack of ability for records to be randomly accessed.
This can be accomplished with reading the entire Flat File and loading record offsets (in bytes) to a program hash table,
for later random access whilst the program is currently in operation/loaded. But this has to be done each time the program
is ran, as the program hash table must be reloaded each time.  A user is not likely to appreciate nor tolerate such a wait time, especially
if the Flat file is very large (millions of records). To solve this problem, the record offsets may be loaded and maintained within
a persistent DBM file tied to a program hash table. That way, the record offsets are immediately available to the program accessing the Flat File database. The File pointer can be set to any record offset (in bytes) within the opened Flat File, for instantaneous random access to any record. #REDIRECT dbm
Erichansen1836 (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flat File Indexing (Instantaneous Random Access to Any Record) 

message: (Sorry I can't be more thorough, but I'm pressed for time.)
During a quick read I noticed some statements that seemed a bit off, or maybe just confusing, that could use a bit of either correction or clarification.  For example the section on contemporary use refers to several legacy products.  Also address books and sqlite are both given as examples of flat file storage.  Address books are structured in various ways.  Some are flat files, but others are not.  As I recall, BBDB has some hierarchical structure, and vCard, which is used for persistence as well at data exchange, is flexible enough to adapt to various structures.   A vCard file can be flat, but it can also be a graph.  Sqlite is a surprisingly full featured SQL database that can be used to manage flat files but is capable of much, much more.  I have feeling that some of this stuff may be accidental artifacts of editing rather than misunderstanding and that a once over to clean up and clarify would probably help a lot.  20:35, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. SQLite is backed by a file, but it does its own indexing and in-place updates on top of that. I will remove SQLite as an example if nobody objects soon. --Damian Yerrick (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Sql server stores its data in one file. Should we list it as a flat file database as well ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.30.149.61 (talk) 08:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

text: The lead section of this article states that "the file must be read in its entirety into the computer's memory" and that changes are made by modifying the data in memory and then writing the entire database "out in its entirety to the host's file system." Though an SQLite database file appears as a single binary file to the host operating system, SQLite modifies the file in place a block at a time and does its own on-disk indexing. The only time SQLite rewrites the whole file is during a VACUUM statement. --Damian Yerrick (talk) 15:19, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assorted Semi-boo-Boos: 

message: "Simple" things should not always be taken for granted. More could be written about so called "fixed-width formatted" files (maybe in its own article).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:6B0:E:4B42:0:0:0:206 (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  fixed width 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Flat file database. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090320001015/http://knowledge.fhwa.dot.gov/tam/aashto.nsf/All+Documents/4825476B2B5C687285256B1F00544258/$FILE/DIGloss.pdf to http://knowledge.fhwa.dot.gov/tam/aashto.nsf/All+Documents/4825476B2B5C687285256B1F00544258/$FILE/DIGloss.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Flat file databases don't have to be read into memory and can meet the base level definition of relational. /rdb, RDB and Nosql, just to name a few, use text files and support at least join, project and select. They're programmed in perl and/or awk plus Unix utilities. There are others written in PHP, Ruby, etc. 
Is a single file with rows and columns a database? I've always had trouble with the idea that something like an address book is a database. 
Anyway, this article really needs to be reworked unless there's a separate one for relational text databases.
Jhart (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't have to be in memory, can be relational, more than a single file