On 01/03/2017 01:17, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 01.03.2017 00:18, Dmitry Kuzmenko wrote:
>> As to BLR, I don't think that eliminating BLR is a good idea. You need
>> to have same or better speed of interpreting SQL
> Execution time does not depend on whether it's BLR or SQL. Parsing time
> (read:
01.03.2017 00:18, Dmitry Kuzmenko wrote:
>
> As to BLR, I don't think that eliminating BLR is a good idea. You need
> to have same or better speed of interpreting SQL
Execution time does not depend on whether it's BLR or SQL. Parsing time
(read: prepare time) depends.
Dmitry
Em 28/02/2017 17:57, marius adrian popa escreveu:
>
> Well if we could get rid of BLR
>
Errors messages have nothing to do with it directly, it depends on
design and implementation of things.
Adriano
--
Check
Hello, Marius!
Tuesday, February 28, 2017, 11:57:10 PM, you wrote:
map> Well if we could get rid of BLR
> database, Interbase. Whenever you did something wrong, it would give you an
> error saying 'Error at BLR offset 283729' or similar, offset being the
bullshit. "Error at BLR offset"...
Well if we could get rid of BLR
"One of the most painful memories I have from software, the stuff that
haunts me in my dreams; is writing stored procedures for Delphi's favorite
database, Interbase. Whenever you did something wrong, it would give you an
error saying 'Error at BLR offset
