Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread liviuslivius
I will not be concerning at it at all. As simple other scensrio cause more problems.Consider 2 tables with already replicated metadata. Second table have foreign key on first. But only second table data are replicated but first not. To what data foreign key will reference in replicated database?

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Mark Rotteveel
On 23-01-2021 14:42, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: 23.01.2021 14:20, Mark Rotteveel wrote: ::=    TEMPORARY Using of ::=    [] [TEMPORARY] won't make a big difference. Yes it does, this would introduce a semantic ambiguity (and probably a syntactic ambiguity. In the original syntax, LOCA

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dimitry Sibiryakov
23.01.2021 15:42, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: If the table metadata is not replicated, there may be problem with stored routines using it. Not if "any routine accessing a local table is also local". We have some spare bits in RDB$RELATIONS.RDB$FLAGS to mark a table as local, right?

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Adriano dos Santos Fernandes
On 23/01/2021 08:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > 23.01.2021 14:20, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >> >> Is there a way to create a local, non-replicated table in a replicated >> database? >> >> I.e. neither "create table" itself nor following DML must be replicated. > > CREATE TABLE is currently always rep

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dimitry Sibiryakov
23.01.2021 14:20, Mark Rotteveel wrote: ::=   TEMPORARY Using of ::= [] [TEMPORARY] won't make a big difference. -- WBR, SD. Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Mark Rotteveel
On 23-01-2021 12:39, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: 23.01.2021 12:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: CREATE TABLE is currently always replicated. The table data may be excluded though. And here we have a good question - if CREATE TABLE specifies DISABLE PUBLICATION, should the CREATE TABLE command itself be

[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-6475) Memory leak when running EXECUTE STATEMENT with named parameters

2021-01-23 Thread Vlad Khorsun (JIRA)
Memory leak when running EXECUTE STATEMENT with named parameters Key: CORE-6475 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-6475 Project: Firebird Core Issue Type: Bug

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dimitry Sibiryakov
23.01.2021 12:39, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:   I would suggest to add syntax "create [local|global] table" which kinda match SQL standard. PS: In Avalerion I simply performed such queries in a transaction with "no replication" flag but Firebird has no such feature. -- WBR, SD. Firebird

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dimitry Sibiryakov
23.01.2021 12:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: CREATE TABLE is currently always replicated. The table data may be excluded though. And here we have a good question - if CREATE TABLE specifies DISABLE PUBLICATION, should the CREATE TABLE command itself be replicated or not? It could solve your need, but

Re: [Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dmitry Yemanov
23.01.2021 14:20, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: Is there a way to create a local, non-replicated table in a replicated database? I.e. neither "create table" itself nor following DML must be replicated. CREATE TABLE is currently always replicated. The table data may be excluded though. And here

[Firebird-devel] Local table in repicated database

2021-01-23 Thread Dimitry Sibiryakov
Hello All. Is there a way to create a local, non-replicated table in a replicated database? I.e. neither "create table" itself nor following DML must be replicated. -- WBR, SD. Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel

[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-6474) Report replica mode through isc_database_info, MON$DATABASE and SYSTEM context

2021-01-23 Thread Mark Rotteveel (JIRA)
Report replica mode through isc_database_info, MON$DATABASE and SYSTEM context -- Key: CORE-6474 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-6474 Project: Firebird Core

Re: [Firebird-devel] Determine if Firebird 4 database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and its replication mode

2021-01-23 Thread Mark Rotteveel
On 23-01-2021 10:43, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: 23.01.2021 12:31, Mark Rotteveel wrote: Going over the Firebird 4 release notes, I was wondering if there is a isc_database_info / Attachment::getInfo() call to determine if a database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and if a

Re: [Firebird-devel] Determine if Firebird 4 database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and its replication mode

2021-01-23 Thread Dmitry Yemanov
23.01.2021 12:31, Mark Rotteveel wrote: Going over the Firebird 4 release notes, I was wondering if there is a isc_database_info / Attachment::getInfo() call to determine if a database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and if a replica, what its replication mode (read-on

[Firebird-devel] Determine if Firebird 4 database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and its replication mode

2021-01-23 Thread Mark Rotteveel
Going over the Firebird 4 release notes, I was wondering if there is a isc_database_info / Attachment::getInfo() call to determine if a database is standalone (no replication), a primary, or a replica, and if a replica, what its replication mode (read-only/read-write) is. For standalone status