>The only version-depended part of isql is metadata extraction. I don't
> think
> that there is a point to worry about its compatibility.
If something is "compatible" it needs to be compatible in **every respect**.
Otherwise, it is not compatible.
Sean
--
Claudio,
> - isql v3 only supports FB3
This would be fine with me.
Although it had a different historical purpose, I only see isql as a
'debugging' and 'scripting' tool for local databases.
Someone needing to support multiple FB versions could create copies of isql
binaries (ie. isql_25.exe
>>> I'd suggest at least RDB$USER_MAP and UserMapping.cpp instead. Maybe
>>> someone else will have a better suggestion.
>>
>> What is the object supposed to represent? (to make sure everyone is
>> one the same page)
>
> It's a tool to map various names received from auth plugin (first of all
> Alex et al,
>
> May I ask to rethink namings, please? Things like RDB$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 b
> Changing gbak so it backs up user enhancements to the system tables is just
> programming, and restoring them after the base table are created isn't hard,
> but both go against the V3 goal of shutting users out of system space.
It depends on your view/definition of "system space" or "system ob
Karol,
> Take into account that user can rollback or commit oryginal transaction
> before we copy all data to clone. Is this a problem or is simple to clone
> transaction in atomic way?
Given that the clone would have the details of an **active** transaction, it
would be isolated from any other
Adriano,
> Instead of get from info and pass "everything" (possible MBs?) in the TPB,
> isn't possible to pass only the "base transaction number" of cloned
> transaction, and them the engine instances dumps necessary information,
> like with monitoring, so the new transaction could reconstruct the
> look at my updated FAQ at the same address http://itstop.pl/en-
> en/Porady/Firebird/FAQ2/FIRST-SNAPSHOT
> at the end of page you have full implementation in Delphi
>
> but as i mentioned earlier - to go in this way - your system must work in very
> short transaction model because you can not
Jim,
> >> But question is - why you need to have many connections in this case?
> >> What is wrong with single connection.
> >> I do not know what exactly are you trying to avoid, but it smell to
> >> me as black-hole design.
> > As I answered to Dimitry S:
> >
> > I need all of the connections to
Vlad,
> In my proposition transactions is fully independent and isolated as usual.
> The only difference of "clone" - is how it was created. After creation we have
> usual transaction with usual behavior. Again, i not offer to "share"
> transaction
> - i offer to clone (or to copy) some of it
> you can adapt my FAQ example
> http://itstop.pl/en-en/Porady/Firebird/FAQ2/FIRST-SNAPSHOT
> but starting all transactions as "First Snapshot" transactions in many
> connections where system is still working i suppose is quite to impossible
> with it.
At first glance it does seem to be appropri
ll
>
> 02.04.2014 22:04, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > I need all of the connections to see the same view of data.
>
>What's wrong with single connection?
>I mean that your requirement to perform one-time export in minimal time
> is questionable. What real problem
> 02.04.2014 21:44, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > I need to extract the data and generate text file -- but I don't need all of
> rows.
>
>What's wrong with an ordinary concurrency level transaction then?
I need all of the connections to see the same view of data.
> > From: Leyne, Sean
> > I need to extract the BI data as a true "snapshot" of data (ensuring FKs are
> valid), in as short a timeframe as possible.
> >
> > Because runtime is critical, I want to break the extract process into
> > logical pieces and
Alex,
> From Sean's letter I've understood that he needs read-only access. If we
> limit ourself with "consistensy read" mode only does not it seem that
> implementation promises to be much simpler?
I did outline a read-only requirement, but I can also think of cases where
read/write support vi
>1 million transaction a day means less than 20 transaction per second.
Yes, if the transactions where evenly throughout the day -- over a 10-12 hour
work day, we are talking about 40-50 transactions per second.
>200 GB on SSD storage is a matter of minutes to be copied.
It depends o
> > As far as I can tell, there is no way for this to be done.
>
> I'd said you need "common snapshot". I.e. few transactions should use the
> same snapshot view of database.
Correct.
> Instead, i think, we could implement something like "clone transaction"
"Clone Transaction" would
All,
Consider a large database (200GB, large tables with 450 Million rows) which is
running on a kick-a** server with pool of enterprise SSDs for storage (more
IOPS then Firebird could ever use), which I need to extract data from on a
regular basis throughout the day for use by an external BI s
Claudio,
> To the dismay of Sean, I continue saying that while we don't declare "name
> independence" and continue relying on RDB$ for some decisions, it's better
> to forbit the RDB$ prefix for user objects. See, for example:
That is not want I was/am saying.
I have problem with forbidding RDB$
> Sub-objects (parameters, columns, constraints) and attributes (say, routine
> source) are not tracked directly.
>
> You should read system tables and compare (in before and after triggers).
How?
Yes I can create a trigger, but I can't read the before/after views of the
system table from a t
> -Original Message-
> From: Claudio Valderrama C. [mailto:cva...@usa.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 9:19 PM
> To: 'For discussion among Firebird Developers'
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] RFC: stop fiddling with sys tables
>
> > -----Original
Carlos,
> LS> OK, but since DDL Triggers don't yet exist -- what should be supported in
> the meantime?
>
> DDL triggers are already available at FB 3:
> http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-2310
Thanks for the link, help a lot.
Sean
> 20.03.2014 23:05, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > I think you missed:
> >
> > - Can/should user create additional columns in System tables? (ie.
> > Create_datetime, Change_datetime -- for a simple schema change
> > tracking function)
> >
> > - Can/should us
> - Creating user objects with RDB$ prefix should be forbidden (at least until
> we implement schemas).
Why?
RDB$System_Flag already exists in RDB$Relations, which identify true system
defined objects, why is it necessary to prevent the use of the prefix by a user?
I think you missed:
- Can/
> The problemas was UAC. When I turned it off, all works normally.
UAC should not impact services.
Where you running FB as an application or service?
What folder was your application installed in?
What folder was FB installed in?
Sean
--
> 13.02.2014 0:38, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > How so, you create your own install which create a \client folder
> underneath your application folder.
> >
> > You can install:
> >
> > - your application into the application folder
> > - firebird.msg into the
> > Probably. But it is easy to isolate your application from
> > customer's environment and make it use your private copy of fbclient.dll +
> firebird.msg.
>
>Yes. And as the result to get "private environment" incompatible with the
> rest of system that leads to application failure.
H
>Can you read? Registry settings MUST NOT being set up if several Firebird
> instances/versions are installed at the same time. Otherwise all of them will
> use the same config file, etc.
If you have multiple versions, you should not use instclient and should place
FBClient.dll and the fire
> 12.02.2014 20:17, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > I don't think this case is correct.
> >
> > The msg file is not supposed to go to the system directory.
>
>The msg file is supposed to be one level up from client library. Public
> library
> is supposed to go
> Firebird.msg is not installed with client
> -
>
> Key: CORE-4336
> URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-4336
> Project: Firebird Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Installatio
> Technically it is possible to make single instance of firebird.exe to
> handle
> some attachment requests by forking new CS process and another
> attachment requests handling by itself (SS\SC). The question - if it is
> possible
> to let him know desired mode for given database...
This w
> 29.01.2014 21:10, Leyne, Sean wrote:
>
> > EngineMode/EngineType = Classic | SuperServer | SuperClassic
> >
> > DatabaseAccess = Shared | Single
> >
> >
> > The install options should take their cue from the config settings, and not
> require inli
> On Wednesday 29 January 2014 17:20:16 Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> > 29.01.2014 18:37, Paul Reeves wrote:
> > > I guess what we really need is to document in firebird.conf how the
> > > -m switch affects the other two settings. There would seem to be a
> > > total of eight combinations.
> >
> > Lack
My last post got munged:
It should have read:
The reality is that there are only 2 set of options::
EngineMode/EngineType = Classic | SuperServer | SuperClassic
DatabaseAccess = Shared | Single
The install options should take their cue from the config settings, and not
require inline switche
> -Original Message-
> From: Leyne, Sean [mailto:s...@broadviewsoftware.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35 PM
> To: For discussion among Firebird Developers
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] recent regression in fb3
>
> Treeve,
> This seems to be an ite
Treeve,
> I regularly run a set scripts to migrate an old Paradox db to Firebird.
>
> The scripts have the following pattern.
>
> 1.define original ddl
> 2.import data
> 3.alter tables
> 4.add indexes
> 5.rearrange data
> 6.check consistency
> 7.add views
> 8.delete old data
>
> Since a few day
Dmitrijs,
> I've enabled ARM64 build of firebird2.5 in ubuntu.
> I don't have access to arm64 machines and hence i have no idea if it actually
> runs =) it does compile though.
While it is good that you worked on the port.
If you don't have an platform to test, why would you bother with the eff
> many times i need to return more then one field from subquery but this is
> not possible and then i must do some join and group by or write stored proc
> or other trick like concat fields by "||"
>
> My question is "Is this because of SQL standard or this is not simple to
> develop?"
>
>
> s
Karol,
Please explain why you need to do this.
I’d like to understand the usage which would require such a feature/function.
Sean
From: liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [mailto:liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:22 AM
To: For discussion among Firebird Developers
Subjec
> 16.10.2013 14:58, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> > Telling true I do not remember it...
> > But quite possible.
>
>Most likely my memory doesn't serve me well. Google shows me only
> thread where Carlos H. Cantu tested it up to current limit and got 3x speed
> up, then DE suggested to test it beyo
> > I will point out that, the specs does allow for GTT to reference GTT,
> > which is not what your original comment stated (that a GTT could not have
> any dependencies/references).
>
> I meant exactly this, sorry if it was not clear.
I have added comments to the 2 related tracker cases,
> > In tracker case 4212, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
> >
> > It is documented since introducing GTT in v2.1 that
> > constraints between temporary and permanent tables is forbidden. This
> requirement is per SQL standard.
> >
> > I want to be sure that this is correct (sorry Vlad), cus it seems
In tracker case 4212, Vlad Khorsun wrote:
It is documented since introducing GTT in v2.1 that constraints between
temporary and permanent tables is forbidden. This requirement is per SQL
standard.
I want to be sure that this is correct (sorry Vlad), cus it seems wrong.
I can see that
> I also am not sure if a GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS ... makes sense for a
> computed column, as it would imply it is a normal column that has a default
> (which already has a separate clause) and not a computed one.
That also struck me as odd.
DEFAULT only makes sense for persisted fields, sinc
Dimitry,
>Does standard explicitly mention that identity's internal sequence must be
> user-manipulatible? Does it say that in must be the same type of sequence
> as "standalone" ones?
>
>Say, Firebird one day decide to support cluster/cloud architecture and keep
> values in identity colum
> I think an USING clause would be a great addition:
>
> GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY [USING SEQUENCE ]
>
> What do you think?
> >>> What Sequence (name) would be used if the USING was omitted?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> A generated one, like now and like happens with constrain
> On 27/08/2013 14:11, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> > 27.08.2013 20:03, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> >> I think an USING clause would be a great addition:
> >>
> >> GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY [USING SEQUENCE ]
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> > Basically, I don't mind, but the behavior wi
> >> I think an USING clause would be a great addition:
> >>
> >> GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY [USING SEQUENCE ]
> >>
> >> What do you think?
> > What Sequence (name) would be used if the USING was omitted?
> >
> >
> A generated one, like now and like happens with constraints and indexes.
Ar
> I think an USING clause would be a great addition:
>
> GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY [USING SEQUENCE ]
>
> What do you think?
What Sequence (name) would be used if the USING was omitted?
Sean
--
Learn the late
Pavel
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:37 AM, "Pavel Zotov (JIRA)"
> wrote:
>
> > Wrong value of data pages average fill percent in GSTAT in case of
> > storing varchars that much longer than page size
> > ---
You seem to be very active in your use of Fire
> It is not too late to add multi-level namespace (schema) and expand the
> width of sql object names so that utf8 languages can have meaningful names
> for their database objects.
AFAIK, changes to the length of objects identifiers are not in scope for 3.0.
Much to my chagrin.
Sean
> The two links at IBPhoenix for the original license (IPL)
> http://www.ibphoenix.com/about/firebird/ipl
> and the (IDPL)
> http://www.ibphoenix.com/about/firebird/idpl
>
> Are true representatives of both licenses.
>
> The IPL is the original license, that was released along with the original
> >> As this example points out, x'##'-codes are not properly matched by
> >> similar
> >> to:
> >>
> >> select
> >> iif(' ' similar to '[[:WHITESPACE:]]', 'T', 'F'),
> >> iif(x'20' similar to '[[:WHITESPACE:]]', 'T', 'F'),
> >> iif(x'20' similar to '%', 'T', 'F') from RDB$DATABASE
> >>
> >
> similar to does not match x'##'-codes
> -
>
> Key: CORE-4114
> URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-4114
> Project: Firebird Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Engine
> Affec
>Bad idea, IMHO. I predict a lot of support request "I see in SHOW TABLE
> that
> field exists, but select throw me error that it doesn't". Error message must
> clearly state its
> reason: "not enough rights to read this field".
That could be addressed by adding "Permission" or "Accessible"
> Back to the question, Vlad asked (we are already discussing how it could be
> done and whether one or the other approach would fit): Is this a feature,
> Firebird should support?
>
> I'm not familiar enough with the SQL-specification to answer whether it's
> standard compliant or not, but if i
> >On the other hand: using select * for anything other than ad-hoc
> >queries is bad. Should we support that?
>
> AFAIK, there's a long legacy, in Delphi components at least, of using SELECT *
> as the dataset spec for emulating a "table" component (TTable and
> derivatives). Sure, this goes b
> So, the proposition is simple: add ability for engine to distinguish such
> service fields and not include it into auto expanded list of fields for table
> or
> view at the queries above. I.e. service fields is fully accessible if present
> in
> query text explicitly and "hidden" otherwise.
All,
Very early this morning (2am EDT), the storage cluster which is used to host
these VMs suffered a critical iSCSI network failure of the storage (due to a
compatibility issue with IPv6).
This failure resulted in a loss of connectivity to the storage and thus a
shutdown of the hosts.
The s
> 17.03.2013 2:35, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > Data and database integrity it one of Firebird best features.
>
>But not in Embedded case. Memory corruption in host application will
> corrupt database.
I think you meant to write "might corrupt", corruption will not
> > No one has said that LO will use the server install of Firebird, it could
> > just
> as easily use the embedded engine which would not have any of the
> network security issues which have been described.
>
> Ah. I get the impression from what I read that they're not aware of the
> embedded
> On 15/03/2013 07:32, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
> > But you are assuming that the user actually knows how to configure a
> > firewall (or even knows what a firewall is). Not all people who
> > install Firebird are system administrators or are aware for the need
> > to secure things. Serious users of
> > There are customers out there who are very concerned about security
> > and for them there should also be a note in the release notes.
>
> The trouble of this solution is that many people use snapshot builds, already
> named 2.5.3. And it has a number of other bugs fixed.
Anyone using snaps
All,
We need to perform maintenance work on the storage cluster which the systems
are running on, so they need to be shutdown.
Thanks in advance for your understanding.
Sean
--
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we
> > Sean, currently code, calling UDF, looks this way
> >
> > template
> > T CALL_UDF(Jrd::Attachment* att, int (*entrypoint)(), UDF_ARG* args) {
> > Jrd::Attachment::Checkout attCout(att, FB_FUNCTION);
> > return ((T (*)(UDF_ARG, UDF_ARG, UDF_ARG, UDF_ARG, UDF_ARG,
> > UDF_ARG, UDF_AR
> > With my 18+ years of using IB/FB I never ran into this issue, never
> > had to use a UDF with more than 5 params, so I was surprised by the error.
> >
> > Is there a 'real' reason why there is a parameter limit? Or, is it a
> > case that a limit was required for syntax purposes and someone t
Hello all,
Have run into a situation where I have a UDF which needs more than 10 input
parameters, but when I try to declare it in DDL the engine reports the
following error:
This operation is not defined for system tables.
SQL error code = -607.
Invalid command.
External functions cannot have
Alex,
> > So the number of individual pages read would equal the number pages in
> the database, which means that the number of dirty pages writes should be
> less than or equal the number db pages.
>
> Sean, take into account that for each deleted record version which changes
> (deletes) index k
Ann,
> > So the number of individual pages read would equal the number pages in
> > the database, which means that the number of dirty pages writes should
> > be less than or equal the number db pages.
>
> Not if some pages were forced out because the cache overflowed and then
> had to be re-rea
Dmitry,
> > I understand that i can get more reads becouse of "small" cache but
> > why writes?
>
> Every read into a cache full of dirty pages (modified by sweep) implies a page
> write, because the engine needs to reuse some page buffer for reading.
That is reasonable, but many times more writ
Ann,
> Sweep work in this way or such different? If yes i should see many reads and
> > only few writes to disk but this not happend. I see >1TB writes to disc
> > for db size 52.74GB.
> >
>
> That seems extreme, but leads to several questions.
>
> One is whether your application regularly make
> 19.11.2012 17:41, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> > As far as I remember in hex, but you may try yourself.
>
>Thanks, I'm not so curious. And I didn't say "big" for nothing: I can't
> imagine
> SQL statement of size 3-4Gb. Firebird statement is limited to 64k, there is no
> way to put big BLOB int
> > I was simply trying to say, that I even with my history with the utility, I
> have a nagging feeling that nbackup could be better. So, I am not sure if
> nbackup is worthy of the official blessing that "fb_backup" conveys.
>
> I know that I had problems with Nbackup when I tried it with our
> > Speaking about meanings, I'd suggest this change:
> >
> > gbak -> fb_dump
> > nbackup -> fb_backup
> >
> > because IMO it better reflects their goals.
>
> Although I was the one who approached Nikolay about the ideas for
> nbackup, and paid for the development, I am not sure that nbackup is
Dmitry,
> > fb_backup, fb_security, fb_fixup, fb_stats and fb_precompile
>
> I believe gpre stands for preprocess, not precompile.
Ok, "fb_preprocess" it is! ;-)
> > I realize that the names are longer than the original, but they are
> > much more meaningful
>
> Speaking about meanings, I'd
> may be Firebird 3 is the good time frame to rename our binaries ?
>
> for example :
> fb_sql, fb_bak, fb_sec, fb_fix, fb_stat, fb_nbackup, fb_qli, fb_pre, fb_split,
> fb_qli
I would suggest:
fb_backup, fb_security, fb_fixup, fb_stats and fb_precompile
I realize that the names are longer tha
The Firebird project Tracker will be down for maintenance starting at 2000 hrs.
this evening.
The maintenance should take less than 1 hour.
Sean
--
Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single
> On 31-10-2012 22:23, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> >
> >
> >>> Over all 12 years of FB development it became clear that *remaining*
> >>> dialect 1 users simply can't switch at all (old legacy app, they
> >>> certainly switch with new app. v
> > Over all 12 years of FB development it became clear that *remaining*
> > dialect 1 users simply can't switch at all (old legacy app, they
> > certainly switch with new app. versions), so giving them another 2
> > years inserting deprecation version before removal will not help them
> > in any
> >I agree that sometime more context from intermediate levels could
> >help to better understand what happens. For example, when transliterate
> >error happens it is good to know assignment destination (field or
> >variable) name. I'm not sure it is easy to implement. But in the case
> >of "
> I don't know wether it has something to do with CORE-3940, but
>
> [...]
> gbak:activating and creating deferred index IDX_RMGM_IMPORT_DNA
> gbak:cannot commit index IDX_RMGM_IMPORT_DNA
> gbak: ERROR:operating system directive CreateFile failed
> gbak: ERROR:Das Gerät ist nicht berei
Ng,
> -Original Message-
> From: ng [mailto:nazimon...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 4:24 PM
> To: 'For discussion among Firebird Developers'
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-3925) Creating self-
> referential FK crashes database (bug-check) whet
> On 15-09-2012 16:03, Doug Chamberlin wrote:
> > Having different order for "SELECT *" is much better than having
> > extracted DDL which will not run!
> >
>
> Order of fields can be altered with ALTER POSITION. But this is workaround
> for a bug!
For clarity, which bug are you referring to?
Dimitry,
> 15.09.2012 20:42, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > The DDL extract should be processing computed fields after 'real' fields.
>
>No. In this case recreated database will have different field order in
> table.
> This will affect "select *" queries.
D
> Step 3 works fine, but when you extract the DDL of the table and try to run
> it,
> it will crash, since it will be extracted like:
>
> CREATE TABLE A (
> FIELD2 NUMERIC(9,2),
> FIELD1 COMPUTED BY (field3 * 0.5),
> FIELD3 NUMERIC(9,2)
> );
Actually, that points out a problem w
Carlos,
> create table a (
> field1 computed by (field2 * 0.5),
> field2 numeric (9,2)
> );
>
> returns:
>
> Column does not belong to referenced table.
> Dynamic SQL Error.
> SQL error code = -206.
> Column unknown.
> FIELD2.
> At line 2, column 22.
>
> BUT
>
> create table a (
> field2 nu
Thomas,
> The test included restoring the same scale 1 TPC-H database with
> setting
> 75 and 10 page buffers before running the backup, thus the
> database backup had a different page buffers value.
>
> In sum, according to trace: While the 75 page buffers restor
Thomas,
> >> The test included restoring the same scale 1 TPC-H database with
> >> setting
> >> 75 and 10 page buffers before running the backup, thus the
> >> database backup had a different page buffers value.
> >>
> >> In sum, according to trace: While the 75 page buffers restore took
> >>
Hey Thomas,
> The test included restoring the same scale 1 TPC-H database with setting
> 75 and 10 page buffers before running the backup, thus the database
> backup had a different page buffers value.
>
> In sum, according to trace: While the 75 page buffers restore took 601030ms,
> the 1000
Thomas,
> I'm currently running a restore of a Firebird 2.5.2 TPC-H scale 1 database
> (both, backup and restore are on a consumer SDD) and in that case the index
> creation process is mainly CPU bound, basically fully utilizing 1 core of my
> hexa-core desktop.
Are you testing using IB XE3?
Bei
> 23.08.2012 18:04, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> > I'm talking about:
> >
> > create view v as select t1.*, t2.* from t1, t2;
> >
> > select v.rdb$record_version from v;
>
>IMHO, it should give "Column unknown" error. I.e. this pseudocolumn must
> be defined for real tables only.
I
> On 20-8-2012 20:03, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > Mark,
> >
> >> I can't seem to connect to tracker.firebirdsql.org, does anybody else
> >> have that problem?
> >
> > I have been able to connect without issues from a client location in India.
Mark,
> I can't seem to connect to tracker.firebirdsql.org, does anybody else have
> that problem?
I have been able to connect without issues from a client location in India.
Sean
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Ex
Mark,
> On 12-7-2012 22:14, Leyne, Sean wrote:
> > Bad example, I should have said that:
> >
> > SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ColumnA = COS( ColumnB)
> >
> > Doesn't use an index when it should be able to, just as the engine is
> > able to use an inde
Dmitry,
> > First, in the original example:
> > select u, u, u
> > from (select gen_uuid() u from rdb$database)
> >
> > there is only one instance of the expression -- there are 3 references to
> > the
> *resolved* expression.
>
> In Firebird, there is no such thing as "instance of the e
Dmitry,
> 12.07.2012 19:44, Paul Vinkenoog wrote:
> >
> > So... have we implemented the DT and CTE features correctly?
>
> I believe it has nothing to do with our implementation of DTs and CTEs.
> Create a view with gen_id and and select that field thrice - you will get the
> same result. And vie
Claudio,
> I think that making everyone pay the cost of the overhead generated by so
> many "hooks" inside the engine is a very bad idea.
This is exactly my point.
It seems that the current approach has a high cost for all usage modes.
Sean
--
Thomas,
> >>> I am also very skeptical about the "need" that to add this
> >>> functionality to
> >> the Trace API, as it falls into the area of PSQL debugging/profiling
> >> which is not what the current functionality is about*.
> >>
> >> I don't propose to extend the Trace API in a way, which go
Thomas,
> > I am also very skeptical about the "need" that to add this functionality to
> the Trace API, as it falls into the area of PSQL debugging/profiling which is
> not
> what the current functionality is about*.
>
> I don't propose to extend the Trace API in a way, which goes into debuging
> > I don't say that we don't need true debugger\profiler, no. But don't
> > limit trace functionality artificially.
>
> Personally, I agree that custom (user generated) trace events could be a
> useful addition, as they extend the application specific auditing tasks.
> But I'm quite skeptic abo
301 - 400 of 464 matches
Mail list logo
