Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory Problem

2006-10-13 Thread paha
>Strange, did you have a single version of the provider installed and >configured in the machine.config right ?? Usually i get only dlls from http://netprovider.cincura.net/, last time i got full installation of 2.0.1rc2, so i uninstalled previous version, and installed the new one. Registry and

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory Problem

2006-10-13 Thread Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Hello: > And yes, i use FbProvider ver 2.0.1 RC2 Strange, did you have a single version of the provider installed and configured in the machine.config right ?? -- Carlos Guzmán Álvarez Vigo-Spain - Using Tomcat but need

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory Problem

2006-10-12 Thread paha
>This looks as working fine for me: > > DbProviderFactory DbFactory = >DbProviderFactories.GetFactory("FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient"); > DbConnection con1 = DbFactory.CreateConnection(); > FbConnection con2 = (FbConnection)con1; I just checked it again, st

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory Problem

2006-10-12 Thread Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Hello: > Possibly I miss something important, and this is a normal behaviour, or may > be not??? Please, advice This looks as working fine for me: DbProviderFactory DbFactory = DbProviderFactories.GetFactory("FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient"); DbConnection con1 = DbFactor

[Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory Problem

2006-10-11 Thread paha
Hi, i found the following Problem it аpplies to FbConnection, but maybe also to other Objects, i didn't tested, so: two cases 1) DbConnection con1 = FirebirdClientFactory.Instance.CreateConnection(); FbConnection con2 = (FbConnection)con1; // works just fine 2) DbProviderFactory DbFactory = DbP

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory

2006-09-12 Thread paha
>You can write your own class, which will encapsulate some DB-specific but >little bit generic procedures (like doing backup, etc.). This allows you to >make your SW independent on specific classes, you will only change the >internals of encapsulating class. It's a widely used "solution". So i

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory

2006-09-12 Thread Jiri Cincura
paha wrote: > provider-aware Database class, unless it deals only with common objects like You can write your own class, which will encapsulate some DB-specific but little bit generic procedures (like doing backup, etc.). This allows you to make your SW independent on specific classes, you will

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory

2006-09-12 Thread paha
Hello: Thanks for the answer >That, the Services api, the isql support, etc .. are Firebird Specific >features that is the reason >you can't use the DbProviderFactory ( that is a base class ) to create >them. I knew that :-D, but i wanted to have my thoughts confirmed by somebody like you :-

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory

2006-09-12 Thread Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Hello: > But there are a lot of objects like FbDatabaseInfo, > FbBackup/Restore and many other, that cannot be created using > DbProviderFactory (FirebirdClientFactory). That, the Services api, the isql support, etc .. are Firebird Specific features that is the reason you can't use the DbProvider

[Firebird-net-provider] FirebirdClientFactory

2006-09-12 Thread paha
Hi, have some questions, may be somebody can help :-) As I understand the usage of DbProviderFactory instead of using FbObjects to create connections, commands and so on, makes the code more common and make it possible to quickly change the provider if necessary without code changes. But there are