Re: [Firebird-devel] Protocol version 13 weird behavior

Did you implement the new null bitmask? Mark - Bericht beantwoorden - Van: "Jiří Činčura" Aan: "For discussion among Firebird Developers" Onderwerp: [Firebird-devel] Protocol version 13 weird behavior Datum: di, mrt. 8, 2016 20:32

[Firebird-devel] Protocol version 13 weird behavior

Hi *, Interestingly when I turn on protocol version 13 (which is really just a 12 with Srp currently in provider), for some statements (insert KO, create table OK, for example) I'm getting no data in response buffer from server after op_execute. There's just 0 bytes waiting for me. Is there some

[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-5141) Field definition allow several NOT NULL clauses

Field definition allow several NOT NULL clauses --- Key: CORE-5141 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5141 Project: Firebird Core Issue Type: Bug Components: Engine

Re: [Firebird-devel] Bool predicate with IS and parameter

> NOT DISTINCT, don't you? I swear I tried that before I sent the question. And it didn't work. Now it works. Maybe I changed something in provider... Confused. -- Mgr. Jiří Činčura Independent IT Specialist --

Re: [Firebird-devel] Several NOT NULL constraints for the same field

08.03.2016 21:00, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > > Should I put it into tracker to let the change be documented as an > incompatibility with > previous versions? Yes, please. Dmitry -- Transform Data into Opportunity.

Re: [Firebird-devel] Several NOT NULL constraints for the same field

08.03.2016 18:16, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > Looks OK to me. Should I put it into tracker to let the change be documented as an incompatibility with previous versions? -- WBR, SD. -- Transform Data into

Re: [Firebird-devel] Bool predicate with IS and parameter

Em 08/03/2016 11:15, Jiří Činčura escreveu: > Hi *, > > is there a way to write a predicate with BOOLEAN column and IS (in FB3)? > Something like `bool_col IS CAST(? as BOOLEAN)`? > You could do with = or NOT DISTINCT, don't you? Adriano

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

Em 08/03/2016 09:33, Dmitry Yemanov escreveu: > 06.03.2016 16:55, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > > >> I think we need DE to make decision. > > The only way > > CREATE OR ALTER SEQUENCE S; > > can be allowed is that is acts as RESTART WITH 0 INCREMENT BY 1 for > existing sequences. > I then see

Re: [Firebird-devel] Several NOT NULL constraints for the same field

08.03.2016 20:10, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >> Do you want to throw a syntax error from the parser or something more >> intelligent like "duplicate constraint definitions are not allowed" from >> DdlNodes? > > Standard syntax error from parser is the simplest solution: > >> SQL> create table

[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-5140) Wrong error message when user tries to set number of page buffers into not supported value

Wrong error message when user tries to set number of page buffers into not supported value -- Key: CORE-5140 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5140

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

08.03.2016 17:46, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > I disagree, the current syntax conforms to the standard. Unless standard require to throw an error on this syntax, we don't violate it but expand for users' convenience. But as you wish. -- WBR, SD.

Re: [Firebird-devel] Several NOT NULL constraints for the same field

08.03.2016 17:59, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > Do you want to throw a syntax error from the parser or something more > intelligent like "duplicate constraint definitions are not allowed" from > DdlNodes? Standard syntax error from parser is the simplest solution: > SQL> create table t (a integer

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

On 08/03/16 17:00, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > 08.03.2016 19:06, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > >> 05.03.2016 22:28, Lester Caine wrote: >>> It would be nice if we did not have re-order scripts from other >>> databases so >>>NOT NULL DEFAULT '30' >>> has to be >>>DEFAULT '30' NOT NULL >>> in

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

08.03.2016 19:06, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > 05.03.2016 22:28, Lester Caine wrote: >> It would be nice if we did not have re-order scripts from other >> databases so >>NOT NULL DEFAULT '30' >> has to be >>DEFAULT '30' NOT NULL >> in Firebird. > > If DY agree, I can commit this change. I

Re: [Firebird-devel] Several NOT NULL constraints for the same field

08.03.2016 19:51, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > 08.03.2016 17:46, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: >>> "create table t (a integer not null not null not null)" is a valid syntax >>> or a bug? >> I'd call it a bug. A very minor one for sure. > > Am I allowed to commit a fix? Do you want to throw a syntax

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

08.03.2016 19:50, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > But you are still sure that "CREATE OR ALTER" must alter attributes that are > not > explicitly mentioned in query?.. I believe that both CREATE and ALTER parts should deliver the same object state. I agree that changing non-referenced attributes

[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-5139) mistake in comment "can't ise MutexLockGuard here"

mistake in comment "can't ise MutexLockGuard here" -- Key: CORE-5139 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5139 Project: Firebird Core Issue Type: Bug Affects Versions: 3.0 RC2,

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

06.03.2016 16:55, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > > I think we need DE to make decision. The only way CREATE OR ALTER SEQUENCE S; can be allowed is that is acts as RESTART WITH 0 INCREMENT BY 1 for existing sequences. This way the behaviour is consistent: both CREATE and ALTER produce the same

Re: [Firebird-devel] Positioned attributes in CREATE/ALTER sequence statement

05.03.2016 22:28, Lester Caine wrote: > It would be nice if we did not have re-order scripts from other > databases so > NOT NULL DEFAULT '30' > has to be > DEFAULT '30' NOT NULL > in Firebird. If DY agree, I can commit this change. -- WBR, SD.

[Firebird-devel] Firebird limits - two different articles with different values

Hi,   what is the limit of rows per table - i have biggest table near 2^30 records and i am worry if i can reach limit   what are really Firebird limits for both FB2.5 and FB3 http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq61/ http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/firebird-technical-specifications/     e.g. table rows in

[Firebird-devel] BLR contexts limit

All, The good thing is that the code internals are more or less ready to work with context/stream number of any size, thanks to Claudio's refactoring. So the issue is mostly about BLR. I see two possible solutions: 1) Bump BLR version, make all context-aware verbs to generate/parse longer

Re: [Firebird-devel] How to create an alternative security database during restore?

Hello, >> >> >>> Did you try to restore using an embedded connection? >> No, not embedded, but via IP. >> >> But I think it makes no difference as the error is the same when >> there is no initialized security table in the configured security >> database. >> > I can suggest you

[Firebird-devel] FYI: Announcing SQL Server on Linux - The Official Microsoft Blog

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2016/03/07/announcing-sql-server-on-linux/ -- Transform Data into Opportunity. Accelerate data analysis in your applications with Intel Data Analytics Acceleration Library. Click to learn