Board index » delphi » alternative to quick report?

2005-08-29 08:00:45 PM
delphi185
Hi,
I 've a datebase with more than 5 thousand records, and it increase
every year.
There isn't a problem to load the records from database and generate new
tables with packed content.
But it takes a lot of time to preview these reports (>30 pages), and the
same to print.
I use the quickreport component (Delphi 5).
Is there any faster solution? and how to handle it)
Karin
 

"K.Zieger" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
:Hi,
:I 've a datebase with more than 5 thousand records, and it increase
:every year.
:There isn't a problem to load the records from database and generate new
:tables with packed content.
:But it takes a lot of time to preview these reports (>30 pages), and the
:same to print.
:I use the quickreport component (Delphi 5).
:Is there any faster solution? and how to handle it)
:
:Karin
:
Karin,
FastReport has the fastest report previewer I have seen. The
online support sucks though.<g>
www.fast-report.com/en/
Sam
 

Download a trial version of ReportBuilder.
www.digital-metaphors.com/download/
Feature matrix
www.digital-metaphors.com/products/feature_matrix.html
--
Nard Moseley
Digital Metaphors Corporation
www.digital-metaphors.com
"K.Zieger" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes

Karin,
beside the other report-engines in the answer-threads you can look to
RaveReports from Nevrona;
since Delphi7 the QR-successor in the reportarea of the Delphi-IDE
Gruss
:-) thomas
"K.Zieger" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>schrieb im Newsbeitrag

take a serious look at ReportBuilder--excellent tool and support.
Ed Dressel
 

Ed Dressel writes:
 

I would avoid Rave if you need SPEED.
It is so much slower than QuickReports.
I am a Delphi Developer of both, and there is no comparison between them when it comes to speed. Rave may look slicker and all, but QuickReports lives up to its name. I have rewritten some of my older QuickReport using Rave, only to find them run at 10% of the speed, which I found unacceptable. Since I drive the repors with the SAME SQL SP's, the only cause of speed difference is the reporting tool itself.
I'm sure others have seen this too.
Mike
"Thomas Pfister" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:

Mike,
I work since 1999 with Rave (started with Rave3 on the visual side of
reporting <g>) and can not believe this.
what type of Reports do you make (M/D-Reports without filtering, or
Groupreports or else).
feel free to start a conversation over eMail ( thomas at
pfister-online_DOT_de) with me, I am really interest about
your experience of slow speed!
:-) thomas
"Mike" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>schrieb im Newsbeitrag

Thomas,
It hasn't mattered which type of report I create in Rave, it is always consistently slower than its counterpart in QR. Rave is especially poor speed at master-details, but it is also much slower at just simple dumps. Perhaps some people will find it acceptable, but when you are generating 10's or 100's or reports at a time, with 100's or 1000's of pages total, the speed difference is VERY noticable. I have commercial software that has a significant amount of reporting involved. When QuickReport was supplanted by Rave starting in D7, I figured I would migrate to Rave. I had an Invoicing report in QuickReport that would run in 30 seconds. The Rave version took many minutes to complete (this was a master-detail, where I did all the preprocessing in SPs under SQL) using the SAME SPs to populate. I then replaced a simple "grid-dump" with Rave, only to find Rave took as much as 10 times as long to create the same dump. So, needless to say, I reverted to QuickReport and purchased the QuickReport PRO 4 to make sure I could stick with QR. That was the end of my QuickReport re-writes to Rave.
So, from my experience (which is rather extensive). It doesn't matter if the report is simply displaying fields from a simple "SELECT * FROM tablename" (either via Query or Stored-Procedures)... it is all much slower than QR.
I know your alliance with Nevrona/Rave. Perhaps YOU should try using QuickReport yourself and run duplicate reports under both tools and then post your speed-findings. Do both simple dumps and/or master-detal reports.
Let us all know the results.
Mike
"Thomas Pfister" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:

Wow, you actually got me to run Quickreport :-)
Ok I did a test using DBDemos database, customer.db table in a simple table
listing. 6 text fields from each row are printed on a simple 0.2 inch high
row which ends up being a 2 page report. To test pure report generation
speed I did the output to file option for both tools and ran it 100 times.
Here's the code to call the QuickReport report (sample given from QuickReport help):
Form1.QuickRep1.Prepare;
Form1.QuickRep1.QRPrinter.Save('test.qrp');
Form1.QuickRep1.QRPrinter.Free;
Form1.QuickRep1.QRPrinter := nil;
Here's the code to call the Rave report (with a TRvNDRWriter component set
to the Engine property of the RvProject1 componet to output to the file):
RvProject1.ExecuteReport('Report1');
Total time to run 100 copies of the Quickreport report was 6.0 seconds
Total time to run 100 copies of the Rave report was 2.4 seconds
Output size of the Quickreport file: 142.9K for 2 pages
Output size of the Rave file: 15.4K for 2 pages
We work very {*word*156} keeping Rave as lean and mean as possible (code based
and visually designed reports). You can see from the above timings that
Rave is much faster and will use up significantly less memory for larger
reports to store the report information for the preview. Rave code is being
run in quite a few server environments where speed is of the essence. We've
replaced some significantly more expensive reporting server products with a
faster and much easier to maintain reporting solution.
I've uploaded my test source files to
www.nevrona.com/files/QrRaveTest.zip in case you or anyone else wants
to run the test. Test was done with Rave 6.0.3 and QuickReport 3.0.9.
Thanks,
Jim Gunkel
Nevrona Designs
"mike" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes