19.05.2014 19:47, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
I would like to submit an attached patch.
You would do everybody a favor if the patch was cleaned from the useless
stuff (commented out code).
Dmitry
--
Open source
03.07.2014 12:45, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
In databases.conf one can use only present in firebird.conf fixed set of
parameters.
See config.cpp for details.
I suppose we have no problems adding replication parameters in it.
I don't think *plugin-specific* settings belong to our config.
Dmitry
03.07.2014 13:18, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
No. Do you have a suggestion?
IMHO, databases.conf is an obvious (from end-user POV) and the best place.
Or just pass the database name into plugin and allow it to store/parse
its own config (database-wide or global) in whatever way the developer
30.06.2014 20:12, Jesus Garcia wrote:
I'm experiencing one problem when trying to recompile stored procedures.
Once I use one stored procedure from my application (that is not called
from triggers and other procedures), the only way to recompile the
procedure is to close user session.
I
30.06.2014 22:37, Jesus Garcia wrote:
But why If nobody is using it and it does not apear in mon$statements the
object is in use?
Because metadata locks are cached even if not explicitly used (to avoid
repeating acquire/release overhead).
Dmitry
30.06.2014 23:16, Jesus Garcia wrote:
Then locks for triggers are different from locks from procedures, and both
are metadata locks.
I can alter triggers with nowait but no procedures.
Triggers are bound to the cached tables, they're not locked separately.
Dmitry
28.06.2014 11:01, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
If a cursor is open, and the SQL-transaction in which the cursor was
opened makes a significant change to SQL-data
At the first glance, this is what we called cursor stability and have
fixed in FB3. But in fact it covers other cases as well and I don't
28.06.2014 11:54, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
As far as I understood, the cursor stability fix was about changes made
by the statement to its own data (eg an UPDATE or DELETE).
The fix was about changes made by statements located underneath the
cursor (e.g. for select + insert/update/delete inside,
28.06.2014 12:47, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
But as a datapoint, PostgreSQL does this:
Read Committed is the default isolation level in PostgreSQL. When a
transaction uses this isolation level, a SELECT query (without a FOR
UPDATE/SHARE clause) sees only data committed before the query began; it
28.06.2014 12:38, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
I am working on replacing the protocol implementation, and now I am
running into a 'problem' with parsing the status vector (or actually
with the result of that parse).
Currently I treat each isc_arg_gds and isc_arg_warning as a separate
exception
27.06.2014 16:52, Jesus Garcia wrote:
The phantom TransactionID appears after one commit retaining of one
transaction.
Commit retaining internally creates a new transaction (with new ID),
hence your phantoms. I think we should add the new ID to trace output
for commit/rollback retaining.
25.06.2014 11:52, Roman Simakov wrote:
present at the opening cursor. IMO it's bad style to open cursor. It
may keep open transaction (it's also not good but RO+RC possible) but
it should not keep open cursor. I do not understand why to open cursor
at all if you are not going to fetch right
25.06.2014 15:28, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
The problem with RC+RO consistent transaction blocking GC may be gone if
the engine runs the query till the end and store it in temporary buffer.
Dmitry, is this (more or less) what is already done to support
bidirectional cursors?
Yes, but this is
24.06.2014 17:35, Daniel Rail wrote:
I don't think it takes out the non-blocking behavior, because the
blocking is only performed at the statement level, not the transaction
level. So, for a lookup dataset, it would not change a thing, since
the query results will always pick up committed
24.06.2014 01:33, Nikolay Samofatov wrote:
If this is what people want, it is possible to add new TPB parameter -
isc_tpb_inconsistency, and
permit it for READ_ONLY + READ COMMITTED transactions only. For as long you
don't use returned data
for anything important it is somewhat safe.
24.06.2014 22:12, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
(*) AFAIU, there's no other practical benefit in the sensitive mode
except the performance.
And the GC blockage in RC RO txns.
Dmitry
--
Open source business process
21.06.2014 01:52, Nikolay Samofatov wrote:
I attach patch for this functionality to give you an idea of
implementation. It depends on a couple other changes so it doesn't apply
to FB2.5 cleanly.
The first thing I'm interested in is the performance impact in OLTP
tests similar to TPCC (with
23.06.2014 23:15, Leyne, Sean wrote:
Actually, without the new behaviour, the engine results are not guaranteed to
be correct.
But the point is that their correctness depends on the application
logic. Lots of applications using RC RO transactions will never be
affected by the cursor
10.06.2014 19:37, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Actually, yes. I don't understand what you call user types of plugins and
their
difference from system types, because support for any plugin type must be
coded in
engine code directly. I cannot imagine a way to work with plugin that
provides
10.06.2014 21:54, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
You are not completely right. Imagine someone adds own provider to
firebird. And that provider except other features wants to load some
modules to perform various user-specific code - that modules can be
treated as firebird plugins, at least plugin
Type: Bug
Components: Engine
Affects Versions: 2.5.2 Update 1, 2.1.5 Update 1, 2.5.2, 2.1.5
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
Test cases for predicates distributed into the union sub-parts:
select * from (
select rdb$relation_name from rdb$relations
union
select rdb
All,
In FB3, we have increased the default page cache size for Classic
(SharedCache = false) from 75 to 256 pages. I'd like to propose other
changes as well:
1) Bump the default page cache size for SuperServer (SharedCache = true)
from 2K to at least 8K pages. Personally, I'd go for ~20K
05.06.2014 14:56, Gabor Boros wrotes:
2) Rename DefaultDbCachePages config setting to something like
PageCacheSize, as default-db-something setting looks weird in the
customized per-database configuration.
If I (a user) read Size associate bytes, kilobytes, etc.
This worries me as well.
23.05.2014 10:24, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Allow dialect 1 to have access to BIGINT fields.
I have a feeling that Adriano already did that for v3.
Dmitry
--
Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser
09.05.2014 16:45, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
09.05.2014 14:37, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
They were always allowed, so we cannot even think about breaking this.
The only thing that may be treated like a bug is CORE-3275.
Ok. From your comment in the ticket I conclude that _every_ matching handler
09.05.2014 20:08, Leyne, Sean wrote:
I was referring to cases where the disk controller has ignored the engine
careful write order, by collapsing disk sector writes and applying them in
a
sequence optimal for the disk but out of order from a FB perspective (Jim's
comment about micro code
09.05.2014 18:13, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
What following asserts are supposed to check?
That the relation type is assigned properly and, additionally, that the
proper flags are already set by the prior MET_lookup_* calls.
My debug build is falling into them every time I try to check
08.05.2014 18:13, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
If a record is inserted or modified, what will be order of page written: data
page
first then index page or vice versa?
IIRC, there is no precedence dependency between these two pages, so they
can be written in any order.
Dmitry
08.05.2014 18:44, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Which data state is supposed to be seen in WHEN block? Before undoing changes
or after it?
Say, we have update t set f=1 then in begin-end block update set f=2 is
done and
then exception is thrown. What value should give select f from t in WHEN
08.05.2014 21:49, Leyne, Sean wrote:
IIRC, there is no precedence dependency between these two pages, so
they can be written in any order.
So, with FW=OFF, killing server in-between can produce both orphan nodes
and missing entries depending on luck and parallel activity.
True, but that is
08.05.2014 22:01, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
True, but that is database corruption problem, not an order of precedence
issue.
Orphan nodes are harmless, missing entries are worse.
We're talking about [missing] entries that should be pointing to
invisible (garbage) record versions. What
08.05.2014 22:08, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
In this case transaction won't be marked as committed and record will be
garbage
collected sooner or later.
Ah, so you meant the case where both TIP and the data page were written
to disk, but the index page was not? Here I agree that FW=OFF makes
07.05.2014 13:12, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Is line tra_flags |= TRA_invalidated enough for that or something more
should be done
for transaction invalidation?
Enough, AFAIK.
Dmitry
--
Is your legacy SCM system
06.05.2014 18:32, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
AFAICS further DML operations are allowed in invalidated transaction.
Shouldn't
ROLLBACK to be the only permitted action?
I would say that it makes sense to reject further DML, as it cannot be
committed anyway. I'm not insisting on that though.
05.05.2014 20:13, Jim Starkey wrote:
AFAIR, int64 integers are not converted into double, they're compressed
using their native format.
If so, it's a bug. The purpose of the index encoding is that all
numbers have the same representation, based on actual value rather than
declaration. It
06.05.2014 12:35, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Decreasing the scale is allowed and should work fine, AFAIU.
Shouldn't it be contrary?.. If in table is value 1.234 and scale is changed
from 3 to
2, this value will be displayed as 1.23, but cannot be found by eq. Vice
versa it works:
value
06.05.2014 22:32, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
I have been having some problems running Firebird 3 correctly from a
zip-kit (as Super Server). After much trial-and-error it looks like when
running as an application, that I need to start Firebird.exe with -a -m
(instead of only -a as documented in
05.05.2014 11:05, Molnár Attila wrote:
I'm createing domains, and using TYPE OF. But as I write it's not
enough. This is just for variable declaration but I need a pair in PSQL
body. Maybe this example would help to understand.
EXECUTE BLOCK
AS
DECLARE VARIABLE tmp TYPE OF COLUMN
05.05.2014 19:06, Jim Starkey wrote:
My sole reservation is that there can be information lost when a large
valued 64 integer is converted into a double to generate the index key.
AFAIR, int64 integers are not converted into double, they're compressed
using their native format.
My second
03.05.2014 21:32, Leyne, Sean wrote:
So, here are my questions:
1. A query’s operations (the reading of the data and sorting) execute
in a single thread/process, correct?
Correct.
2. Is Internal sorting performed by the ExecuteWriteTempSortBlock() step?
Internal buffer is sorted as
03.05.2014 20:48, Leyne, Sean wrote:
My statement was based on my memory of why the use of IS NOT NULL was
disabled in earlier FB releases.
If IS NOT NULL can be treated the same as any other condition, why isn't it
now?
Firebird (and many other DBMS) simply don't use indices for negated
03.05.2014 20:48, Leyne, Sean wrote:
I don't see what statistics will tell the engine.
Unlike index distribution statistics, which provides some details on the
commonality of values, I don't see how stats on the orderedness of a
primary key provide any meaningful details, when the stat is
03.05.2014 22:12, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Internal sort (quicksort, btw) does not move records, only pointers. Records
are
re-ordered in sort order before full run is written to disk (if necessary).
Sorry, I was talking about external sorting in general, not quicksorting
the internal buffer.
02.05.2014 23:25, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
- also it allows to have index coverage (also requires to use such index key
encoding which allows
to recover original value from index key)
Is the problem mostly in numeric-double conversion or does compress()
mangle the key unrecoverrably in any
30.04.2014 13:50, Molnár Attila wrote:
*SIZE OF CHAR/VARCHAR domain or variable name, SCALE OF NUMERIC
domain or variable name*
- SIZE OF : returns max CHAR/VARCHAR length or NUMERIC precision,
SCALE OF : return scale of NUMERIC
- gain : by defining a variable with DOMAIN or TYPE
02.05.2014 22:03, Leyne, Sean wrote:
It depends. Primary key may be stored more-or-less in regard to physical disk
location. And the measure how good is INDEX vs NATURAL scan can be
available to the optimizer (index clustering factor).
Without the knowledge of way that Primary Keys map to
01.05.2014 23:24, Leyne, Sean wrote:
Optimization I.
- VOLATILE (default) / DETERMINISTIC flag for UDF and FUNCTION (maybe
lifecycle for deterministic : statement, transaction, connection)
- gain : preformance (can cache DETERMINISTIC UDF/FUNCTION results)
Actually, I think that
29.04.2014 02:13, Thomas Beckmann wrote:
Main focus should be in asynchronous multi master scenarios, as Carlos
pointed out. Everything else seems to be as specialization...
Dimitry Sibiryakov will surely correct me, but I always thought that
multi-master replication can hardly work without
28.04.2014 23:05, Carlos H. Cantu wrote:
I think most of them needs basic asynchronous replication, covering
single and multi-master scenarios. For those who needs more complex
scenarios, there are third party comercial tools. Anyway, I'm not the
right person to answer, since I didn't need
28.04.2014 23:31, Dalton Calford wrote:
Architecturally, Firebird database is not active without user
connections. This slightly changes with the LINGER support, but not so
much. So the question is who should be waiting for the timer events when
nobody is connected. And if it
29.04.2014 02:02, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
I may be wrong as often, but AFAIU this dream may be a reality if:
1) Eliminate DFW
2) Perform DDL (operations with system tables) in user transaction
3) Make garbage collector to handle system tables well
And reimplement the undo log to handle
29.04.2014 12:09, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
If you look at SQL Server, there jobs themselves are not defined for a
specific database (although they may depend on one or more databases).
AFAIK they are stored in the master database. Execution requires an Agent
service to be running.
We neither
29.04.2014 13:12, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
According to its isolation level, I'd say.
So user snapshot transaction should not seen changes done by itself (as
user thinks, as it executes DDL in the same transaction)? Of course it
can be documented, but I'd rather avoid such a tricky behavior.
29.04.2014 13:05, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Technically - it is possible. Practically - what generation of altered object
user transaction should work with ?
Statements already having the object cached - the old version.
Statements to be [re]prepared - the new version, as the metadata cache
will
29.04.2014 20:40, marius adrian popa wrote:
While you mention PDP maybe is time for a task to cleanup all VMS dead
code and languages (Claudio ?)
Is there any VMS code remaining? We had wiped it out a while ago, IIRC.
Only a few pieces were kept, related to the DLM (in tra.cp and /lock).
28.04.2014 01:04, Jesus Garcia wrote:
Allways my customers require me features that oracle and sql server has
Well, they should understand that Firebird will never have all those
features from Oracle and MSSQL. The question is what they really need.
1. Built-in replication. Our customers
28.04.2014 16:14, Simonov Denis wrote:
My list is as follows.
Thanks, but I seemed to explicitly state that plain wishlists don't
count. Choose top five from your list, start separate thread per feature
and argue why we should prefer these features over other ones.
Dmitry
28.04.2014 20:30, Carlos H. Cantu wrote:
It seems that I also didn't understand that you wanted separated
messages for each feature discussion :(
Well, we may start with the features intermixed inside this thread and
then separate them for a more detailed discussion, if necessary.
I just ask
28.04.2014 19:48, Dalton Calford wrote:
Android and iOS native clients if not native servers, are extremely
important given the market growth in those areas and the lack of a good
solid database engine to work with.
Isn't sqlite solid enough? ;-) At least for the tasks a tablet can run.
A
28.04.2014 18:29, Carlos H. Cantu wrote:
Here is my list:
Arrrgh! :-)
I've skipped the items I have nothing to say about (mostly due to lack
of interest, sorry for fairness).
2) I second Jesus Garcia request for native replication, since people at
FDD and in FireBase's list are always
28.04.2014 18:37, Scott Morgan wrote:
This message is the invitation to both project members and users who
closely follow the development.
UTC time zone support. Vital for international work and handy even for
general use.
Nice reminder, although I don't think it's trivial to implement.
28.04.2014 16:14, Simonov Denis wrote:
optimizer
1. Enable use MERGE / HASH JOIN for OUTER JOINs
2. Performing EXISTS / IN SEMI JOIN as including using MERGE / HASH, and
NESTED LOOP using index
3. HASH aggregation Add to an existing method using sorting
I don't think the optimizer
All,
We're getting closer to the v3.0 feature freeze which is going to happen
this summer. Everything roadmapped for v3 but not implemented before the
deadline will be postponed. The next-after-v3 release is likely to
incorporate most of the postponed features, but there may be new
features
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
It would be useful to track timing for different operations and aggregate these
values at request / transaction / connection / database levels as other runtime
statsitics is maintained. In particular, I was thinking about total time spent,
CPU time (maybe
Components: Engine
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
Priority: Minor
Either explicit (DECLARE AS CURSOR) or implicit (FOR SELECT) PSQL cursors could
make their current record available via the cursor name similar to OLD/NEW
trigger contexts, thus making the INTO clause optional
Claudio,
Is this feature being asked for?
;-)
Yes and it's very handy for people with an Oracle background. I wished
it was here in Firebird when I was its user back in 2000 ;-)
What I see is that fields with the same name, even though they come from
different tables, would need to be
Claudio,
People, what is position of the team regarding isql v3's ability to connect
to older server versions?
- isql v3 only supports FB3
- isql v3 only supports FB3 and FB2.5
- isql v3 should support the whole FB2.X series.
I'd say ISQL should support *at least* those versions that the
15.04.2014 19:59, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
The only version-depended part of isql is metadata extraction. I don't think
that there
is a point to worry about its compatibility.
There's also another one - family of SHOW commands. And they're expected
to work as long as you're able to connect
15.04.2014 20:23, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
And they will work as long as one requests objects that existed in previous
versions.
If show.epp/extract.epp is cleaned up to support v3.0 / ODS12 only, then
requesting objects existing in v2.0 / ODS11 may fail. This is the whole
point of this
15.04.2014 21:30, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
If show.epp/extract.epp is cleaned up to support v3.0 / ODS12 only, then
requesting objects existing in v2.0 / ODS11 may fail. This is the whole
point of this discussion.
Do anybody have examples of what will fail and how?..
Supporting v3 / ODS12
14.04.2014 20:21, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
In this case shouldn't vio.cpp:realoc_record() to be reworked as well to avoid
allocations?
It extends the record only when required (new format is longer than the
prior one). It's not something happening often for a single table.
Dmitry
Components: Engine
Affects Versions: 3.0 Alpha 2, 3.0 Alpha 1
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
If a concurrent transaction has deleted (and committed) the record that our
transaction is trying to lock, the engine keeps infinitely attempting to lock
the deleted record
13.04.2014 19:26, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
What is the meaning of 'force' parameter for TRA_rollback?
Is it license to leave database in inconsistent state: with orphan
pages/BLOBs/index
nodes for the sake of instant end of transaction?
Yes. The state of transaction is consistent (rolled
13.04.2014 20:05, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
In this case I would say that calling VIO_verb_cleanup() at the beginning is
overkill
because inside it will do slow rollback for each savepoint.
VIO_verb_cleanup() rolls back nothing unless sav_verb_count is non-zero.
It shouldn't be the case
09.04.2014 09:56, Alex wrote:
On 04/09/2014 10:14 AM, Claudio Valderrama C. wrote:
Folks, sorry for nitpicking, but I don't like this alias in
classes\InternalMessageBuffer.h:
typedef ArrayUCHAR Buffer; // May be it will become a class in the future,
but now it is just a plain array
08.04.2014 11:54, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Personally, i not consider it as important,
if nbackup v3 will not work with Firebird before v3...
Me neither. But if it can be easily done, why not.
Dmitry
--
Put Bad
Alex et al,
May I ask to rethink namings, please? Things like RDB$MAP or
/jrd/Mapping.cpp sound very confusing. What is mapped to what? Maybe
Mapping.cpp is about memory mapped files?
I'd suggest at least RDB$USER_MAP and UserMapping.cpp instead. Maybe
someone else will have a better
07.04.2014 14:31, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
HalfStaticArray has no overhead as long as it works with statically
allocated memory.
But does not matter - as long as 3 elements is potential bug there is
really no need in it.
Please leave this ticket / patch up to me.
Dmitry
07.04.2014 21:21, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
IIRC at the time of FB 1.5 this context things and call of SET_TDBB() at the
beginning
of every routine were considered as a temporary stubs till proper code
cleanup for proper
encapsulation and getting rid of side effects. Is my memory wrong or
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
Priority: Minor
While a proper metadata naming convention surely helps, the engine could be
polite enough to report not only the name of the used object but its type
(table/index/procedure/etc) as well. Also, for used indices currently a string
INDEX
: Engine
Affects Versions: 3.0 Alpha 2, 3.0 Alpha 1, 2.5.2 Update 1, 2.1.5 Update 1,
2.5.2, 2.1.5, 2.5.1, 2.1.4, 2.5.0, 2.1.3, 2.1.2, 2.1.1, 2.1.0
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
The USHORT pp_sequence number wraps and it may lead to unexpected issues like
an infinite loop inside
03.04.2014 20:16, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
May I propose the attached fix that uses second approach?..
I'm not sure I like the extra load put on the memory manager. I'd rather
think about replacing the original tra_undo_record buffer with a stack
of record buffers ready for reuse.
Dmitry
03.04.2014 20:32, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
I'm not sure I like the extra load put on the memory manager.
It is transaction-local memory pool.
Even if there's no contention there, allocating/deallocating is always
slower than not doing that at all.
IMHO, this is unnecessary code
03.04.2014 20:38, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Take into account that the record content is copied from temporary storage
(may be read
from disk). Allocation from local pool is not a big deal in this case.
From another side, the record data has enough chances to be copied from
the TempSpace
03.04.2014 20:59, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
I.e. duplicate code from memory pool in jrd_tra, except may be those couple
of atomic
ops mentioned by Alex.
OMG. Get back and re-read what I was proposing.
Dmitry
--
02.04.2014 20:59, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
What is the reason why VIO_erase() always creates a new record version
instead of using
update_in_place() as it does VIO_modify()?
Can you imagine the same record being deleted twice?
Dmitry
02.04.2014 22:03, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
What is the reason why VIO_erase() always creates a new record version
instead of using
update_in_place() as it does VIO_modify()?
Can you imagine the same record being deleted twice?
No. But what it changes?
VIO_update() calls
02.04.2014 22:16, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
VIO_erase() cannot delete some record twice in the same
transaction, period.
But it can delete updated record, no?..
Yes, but this is still going to be the last version in the chain.
Perhaps nobody cared whether there will be two or three versions
01.04.2014 20:38, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
Reading code, I see that in some cases DPM_get()+VIO_data() is used to get
record data
and in some other cases DPM_fetch()+VIO_data() is used for the same purpose.
But I cannot
understand what is the difference between these cases. I see that
29.03.2014 23:06, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Record buffer is cached at the transaction level and exists in single
instance. It is OK
while we use just one instance of record buffer at the same time.
What is meant here by record buffer -- tra_undo_record or what?
Dmitry
28.03.2014 19:23, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
The only problem would be old server accessed with new client and
message file.
It will show:
validation error for column Missing arg #3 - possibly status vector
overflow.NAME, value ...'
IIRC, the overflow protection (missing arg N)
28.03.2014 19:23, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
But AFAIK, value @2 is also new, which also causes problem, so I don't
think this is a showstopper.
Nope, value @2 is there for at least a decade. I see it in the v2.0
sources.
Dmitry
27.03.2014 19:46, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
Do you think it's ok to output validation error for column TABLE.ID?
Just for the record, I was thinking the same line.
Dmitry
--
Firebird-Devel mailing list,
26.03.2014 10:44, Thomas Beckmann wrote:
Please consider the following example:
with recursive
CTE_CNT as (select 1 as I from RDB$DATABASE
union all select I + 1 from CTE_CNT where I 20)
select i.I, j.I, k.I from CTE_CNT i
left join CTE_CNT j on i.I = j.I and j.I10
join CTE_CNT k on j.I
21.03.2014 19:31, Norbert wrote:
WI-T6.3.0.30932 Firebird 3.0 Alpha 2
on CENTOS 6.5 and W7
create table test (
id integer generated by default as identity primary key,
siteid integer not null);
create index ix_test_siteid on test (siteid);
insert into test ( siteid )
21.03.2014 20:32, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
Obviously a bug. Working on it, thanks.
Fixed now, please test.
Dmitry
--
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
Graph Databases is the definitive new guide
21.03.2014 01:38, Claudio Valderrama C. wrote:
- Linking user tables to sys tables (FK) should be forbidden (I didn't try,
but if it works, it shouldn't).
Sys tables don't have PK/UK constraints (only unique indices), so FKs
cannot be created.
- User code should not fiddle with sys
Type: Bug
Components: Engine
Affects Versions: 3.0 Alpha 2, 3.0 Alpha 1, 2.5.2 Update 1, 2.1.5 Update 1,
2.5.2, 2.1.5, 2.5.1, 2.1.4, 2.5.0, 2.1.3, 2.1.2, 2.1.1, 2.1.0
Reporter: Dmitry Yemanov
Artificial test case:
set planonly;
select * from (
select rdb$relation_id
11.03.2014 11:27, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Then post links to working sites ;) I can't access it whole yesterday
and today nothing changed.
Same here, although I managed to access that article via a different URL
yesterday:
http://www.tuicool.com/articles/qIvAra
It also works badly, but the
11.03.2014 09:59, marius adrian popa wrote:
I needed comments from developers also
You'd better ask questions then. I don't care to comment what unknown
people write about Firebird over the internet.
Dmitry
--
801 - 900 of 1223 matches
Mail list logo
