On 11/13/13 17:50, liviuslivius wrote:
>> At least I no longer have any Interbase systems live these days :)
>>
>> --
>> Lester Caine - G8HFL
>> -
>> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
>> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
>> EnquirySolve -
> At least I no longer have any Interbase systems live these days :)
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Di
On 11/13/2013 12:07 PM, liviuslivius wrote:
>> I probably know even less than you about the internals, but I think it's
>> time to stop assuming that IB and FB will and should be kept compatible.
>> In the long run it not feasible, nor desirable. These are two separate
>> products and must be allow
> I probably know even less than you about the internals, but I think it's
> time to stop assuming that IB and FB will and should be kept compatible.
> In the long run it not feasible, nor desirable. These are two separate
> products and must be allowed to find their individual paths forward
>
liviuslivius skriver:
>> I know this is not what many people want to hear, but it's probably high
>> time to consider IB and FB to be two unrelated databases, and never
>> expect them to be compatible in any way. With that mindset and those
>> expectations, you will probably find your life easier.
13.11.2013 11:10, liviuslivius wrote:
> i suppose that changing integer value from 32764 to the same value as is in
> Interbase will cause that FB and IB will be compatible for Boolean
> but may by i am wrong - i know only a little about internals
Having the same SQL-types means that both the bi
> I know this is not what many people want to hear, but it's probably high
> time to consider IB and FB to be two unrelated databases, and never
> expect them to be compatible in any way. With that mindset and those
> expectations, you will probably find your life easier. They've diverged.
> Ge
liviuslivius skriver:
> I know that Firebird go in self direcrion and Interbase is only start
> point for it but
> i need to know if is possible to have compatibile descriptor (field
> type) of Firebird Boolean data type as is in Interbase?
> Now we got "Unknown SQL data type (32764)" in IBX when
On 12-11-2013 10:54, liviuslivius wrote:
> Hi,
> I know that Firebird go in self direcrion and Interbase is only start
> point for it but
> i need to know if is possible to have compatibile descriptor (field
> type) of Firebird Boolean data type as is in Interbase?
> Now we got "Unknown SQL data ty
Short answer no .
Well this is a Interbase Express issue (ibx supports officialy only
interbase) and i think emabarcadero is recommending FireDac these days
(supports also Firebird) to access other databases
For alternatives try IBObjects
If you have the source for ibx you can also define the ne
Hi,
I know that Firebird go in self direcrion and Interbase is only start point for
it but
i need to know if is possible to have compatibile descriptor (field type) of
Firebird Boolean data type as is in Interbase?
Now we got "Unknown SQL data type (32764)" in IBX when we use FB3.0 database
fo
11 matches
Mail list logo
