About the U10 DICT | Uniface 10 Enterprise Edition | Forum


Please consider registering

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

—  Results per page  —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
For a group of consecutive words like 'end of support' use Match phrase

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
About the U10 DICT
12 Jan 2018
11:10 am
Forum Posts: 1868
Member Since:
01 Oct 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Adrian mentioned in: https://unifaceinfo.com/forum/uniface9/anyway-to-use-session-panels-to-trigger-startupshell-triggers/#p6052893

But it has always been our intention that we would document the Uniface 10 dictionary when complete (with Uniface 10.3).

Even if we did not, we can’t stop access to those tables.

So to put an end to any more fake news..


But as all of us know, since the very old days, variable length fields in the DICT are not stored in different database fields, but they are all mashed together and maybe scattered in the nice OVERFLOW tables as well. So individual information can not be reached so easyly.

I already created my own DICT in Sep-2016 and found some incompatibilities with the U9 dict reports.

Perhaps they are gone with the official 10.3 DICT, but it is worth to migrate a handful of DICT reports (especially those using COMMENT fields) and see if they still do their job.

16 Jan 2018
2:47 pm
Theo Neeskens
Forum Posts: 366
Member Since:
01 Oct 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi Uli, and others,

Here is a short update on 10.3 and DICT, you will get:

– Restructured repository (typed libraries, preparation for work area support, removal of long deprecated stuff)

– Updated descriptions of the entities and fields of DICT in the umeta.xml

– Fresh umeta.xml with every patch (so we can further improve descriptions when needed)

– Explanation of the repository changes in the ulibrary

– Switch to create sql scripts for your repository tables for any supported database and its driver options

There will still be fields in overflow tables, so you will still need Uniface to access all data.
And there will be quite a lot of changes, so the new DICT is not compatible with Uniface 9 or even 10.2.
Any reports or tools customers have made will need revision.
But the really basic stuff has not changed much, so it is not always a lot work to get your tools working again.
Since we don’t want you to do the changes multiple times, we are doing our best to get it right in 10.3.

We are finishing up the work on the repository now. I can’t give you a timeline for the release of 10.3, but when it comes it will contain this.




17 Jan 2018
9:27 am
Forum Posts: 1868
Member Since:
01 Oct 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi Theo,

thanks for the little insight “what is in the pipe” as far as the 10.3 repository is concerned.

Especially the documentation in the description (and perhaps comments?) needs an update
as even the 9.7.04 DICT shows “Uniface Repository version”.


As I said, it may be good for “Early Adopters” to choose a couple of their productive DICT reports right now
and test them against the U10.3 DICT (including automatic U9 to U10 migration) as soon as 10.3 is available.

I think this will give you in Amsterdam some early feedback what problems wait “in the trenches”.

TIA for your efforts,

17 Jan 2018
10:07 am
Adrian Gosbell
Amsterdam, seat 77a of a Boeing 747
Forum Posts: 318
Member Since:
01 Oct 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

We’ve migration tested 30 or so different customer apps with the goal to make the transition as smooth as we can make it. Getting our hands on those apps, and the subsequent questions and conversations has been a good exercise. We intend to have a webinar session on this. 

There could well be some steps we could not automate in some ‘edge cases’. These have typically been because in previous migrations, certain steps were not taken, or as a consequence of making updates directly in the repository at some time or another.

Making the move to the new repository as hassle free as we feasibly can do has been a consideration from the beginning of the project As I’ve said at a few user group sessions, a lesson learnt from previous migrations where we could have done better.

Mitigating this risk was the reason why we chose not to remove overflow tables. Starting from new is one thing, but migrating existing repositories is something different. 

Forum Timezone: Europe/Amsterdam

Most Users Ever Online: 131

Currently Online:
33 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

ulrich-merkel: 1868

Iain Sharp: 674

Theo Neeskens: 366

gianni: 343

Adrian Gosbell: 318

istiller: 296

rogerw: 272

Knut: 224

lalitpct: 197

Arjen van Vliet: 184

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 3

Members: 10312

Moderators: 0

Admins: 6

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 62

Topics: 2294

Posts: 9946

Newest Members:

Pfqgfni, glennarm2, Punsnxu, Kevinshamp, CliffInali, janicetupct88, murielfo3, paulpn16, KreditovichHaist, evangelinerr2

Administrators: admin: 23, diseli: 1028, Nico Peereboom: 84, richiet: 406, Mike Taylor: 35, JanCees: 38