On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Or is there a reason to ignore those higher bits for the facility
and code?
I have no idea why ENCODE_ISC_MSG written in this way.
CLASS_MASK seems to not be used anywhere, or at least I can't
On 7/27/2015 11:31 AM, Ann Harrison wrote:
27.07.2015 1:24, Ann Harrison wrote:
Firebird was based on InterBase which was based on Rdb/ELN, an
implementation of DEC's [standard(!)] relational
interface. As part of DEC's VAX software empire, DSRI used
DEC's error
27.07.2015 1:24, Ann Harrison wrote:
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
Or is there a reason to ignore those higher bits for the facility and
code?
I have no idea why ENCODE_ISC_MSG written in this way.
CLASS_MASK seems to not be used
On 25-7-2015 15:08, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
25.07.2015 15:45, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
How would I go about that if none of the errors in that facility are
defined inside Firebird,
We could define and reserve facility code for Jaybird and let you know it.
That would be great.
and how can
26.07.2015 12:08, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
On 25-7-2015 15:08, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
25.07.2015 15:45, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
How would I go about that if none of the errors in that facility are
defined inside Firebird,
We could define and reserve facility code for Jaybird and let you
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Vlad Khorsun hv...@users.sourceforge.net
wrote:
Or is there a reason to ignore those higher bits for the facility and
code?
I have no idea why ENCODE_ISC_MSG written in this way.
CLASS_MASK seems to not be used anywhere, or at least I can't remember
Up to now Jaybird has always used the Firebird error codes, or specific
error messages defined in code.
I am currently looking into defining some Jaybird specific error codes,
with associated messages and SQL states. To prevent collisions with
future error codes in Firebird, I'd like to know
25.07.2015 14:57, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Up to now Jaybird has always used the Firebird error codes, or specific
error messages defined in code.
I am currently looking into defining some Jaybird specific error codes,
with associated messages and SQL states.
Are you going to report is using
25.07.2015 15:16, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
To prevent collisions with
future error codes in Firebird, I'd like to know if using codes below
3 would be sufficient to prevent collision, or would it be
better to follow the same formal rules as used inside Firebird to
generate error codes (eg
On 25-7-2015 14:16, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
25.07.2015 14:57, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
Up to now Jaybird has always used the Firebird error codes, or specific
error messages defined in code.
I am currently looking into defining some Jaybird specific error codes,
with associated messages and SQL
10 matches
Mail list logo
