Re: ODP: [firebird-support] Using Union and Join (of two tables residing in different databases)in a Query

['Stellarancia.com' ni...@stellarancia.com [firebird-support]]

He, Helen,

I don't understand as you have been able to believe that I have treated 
a database as was a spreadsheet!!! I know what is a table, a database 
(database as "set of tables", database as "file of type database"), a 
relation, a key, an inedex, a... I've studied on your book.

When I speak "to draw a table" for a program, I intend to set various 
"tables" with the appropriate fields (name and type) and the 
relationships with the fields of other "tables": so the database is the 
whole organized of these "tables" and relations. Right?

if it is not correct, I go to be a carpenter...
else
- a client ask me to write a program for a  single scope, the archives 
(the "tables" in the database!) must be able to contain the data related 
to that type of activity and I draw (create, write) a dabatase with the 
correct tables;
- different clients ask me different types of programs: FOR ME, a 
database must be created (drawn) for each type of program;
- two or more programs can have some identical "table" (e.g. 
municipalities);
- (1) I can create apart a unique database of "common tables" for the 
"tables" used by all the programs; (2) the same "table" can be repeated 
in all the databases;
- it could be created an only database for all the programs; for every 
new program, new "tables" can be added in this unique database, while 
the "table" existing can be used by the new program;
- if you write dozens of programs (very small, normally, very great), 
the only database becomes not manageable, *but it doesn't behave problems*.
"not manageable" FOR ME as administration of the variations to the 
single fields: Firebird is able of to manage millions of tables and 
relationships, I can't, is its purpose!!
You pursue a purpose of general relations, that is the purpose of DBRMS; 
I pursue a purpose of management USING Firebird and its capability to 
relate: it is not the same thing! FOR ME, naturally!!
 From this my problem is born, but I can change my formulations.

I need to think.
Thanks for the devote time : you must also work...
Best regard
Antonio BIANCA



Il 15/09/2018 07:16, Helen Borrie hele...@iinet.net.au 
[firebird-support] ha scritto:
>
> Antonio,
>
> > I'm agree with you: all tables in a unique firebird file is the best 
> choice.
>
> > My problem is that I've numerous programs that utilize one firebird file
> > each.
>
> That problem is easy to solve. Place all of the tables in one
> database and use an alias for that database in every application.
>
> > There are tables that are drawn for a specific program, but there are
> > some tables that are "common" to all programs (example:
> > "municipalities").  An user can utilize one program, two programs, four
> > programs, and so on, on the same computer and each program hav its
> > database.fdb: if I must vary a value of one "common tables", I must send
> > an update for every program and to each user; but if the "common tables"
> > are in a unique, separate database, I can update one file only.
>
> This is not a database design. You are treating "database" and
> "spreadsheet" as though they were the same animal. Very definitely,
> they are not the same.
>
> Think "relational", because Firebird is a relational database system.
> Tables (a.k.a. relations) can be *related* to one another by way of
> foreign keys. Data from tables containing compatible fields (columns)
> can be connected during run-time queries by JOINs or UNIONs.
>
> > There are also "static" tables containing storical movements, and is not
> > necessary periodically to back-up them.
>
> At the same time, it does no harm for them to be included in the
> backup of your current data. It makes sense for them to be in the
> same database as the active tables if you need to refer to them from
> your applications.
>
> > These are the reasons that push me to look for a solution, I hope to
> > have been clear.
>
> The thing that seems clear to me is your confusing "tables" with
> "databases". The whole point of using a relational database is to
> have all of the interrelated data available to each individual client
> connection.
>
> > For release 2.5 and not 3.o, I have been studyng Firebird for some
> > months, and I've not experience: I now plan the job to develop, later I
> > will verify the new releases.
>
> The question of whether you use 2.5 or 3.0 is not relevant to your
> problem. Spend some more time understanding how a relational database
> works - and forget your preconceptions from previous work you have
> done using spreadsheets or fiel-based data storage systems.
>
> Helen
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
> 


---
Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: [firebird-support] ISQL connects with any credentials?

[Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support]]

17.09.2018 16:04, Kjell Rilbe kjell.ri...@marknadsinformation.se 
[firebird-support] wrote:
> I just noticed that on my server I can connect to ANY database using ANY
> credentials, even with user names that don't exist. And for existing
> user name, it doesn't matter what password I specify - I can still
> connect and select from e.g. rdb$relations.
> 
> Why does this happen?

   You use embedded mode.


-- 
   WBR, SD.






++

Visit http://www.firebirdsql.org and click the Documentation item
on the main (top) menu.  Try FAQ and other links from the left-side menu there.

Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com/resources/documents/ 

++


Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firebird-support/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firebird-support/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
firebird-support-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
firebird-support-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
firebird-support-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

Re: [firebird-support] Transliteration problem with table locks?

[Mark Rotteveel m...@lawinegevaar.nl [firebird-support]]

Given your problem occurs with the Firebird .net provider, I'd suggest 
your first port of call should be the firebird-net-provider mailing 
list. That is probably leads to a more focused analysis instead of 
asking on the firebird-support and firebir-devel mailinglists.

Mark

On 15-9-2018 07:51, Kjell Rilbe kjell.ri...@marknadsinformation.se 
[firebird-support] wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've been using Firebird since a long time, using quoted identifiers
> with Swedish characters åäö in them. I am now at version 3.0..3 (on
> Windows Server 2016, 64 bit).
> 
> Now I tried this code in C# using FirebirClient 6.3.0.0:
> 
> Dictionary locks = new Dictionary FbTransactionBehavior>() {
>     { "KörningInstans", FbTransactionBehavior.Protected |
> FbTransactionBehavior.LockWrite },
>     { "Körning", FbTransactionBehavior.Protected |
> FbTransactionBehavior.LockWrite }
> };
> FbTransaction trans = connection.BeginTransaction(new
> FbTransactionOptions() {
>     LockTables = locks,
>     TransactionBehavior = FbTransactionBehavior.Consistency |
> FbTransactionBehavior.Write
> });
> 
> The BeginTransaction call fails with an exception "arithmetic exception,
> numeric overflow, or string truncation
> Cannot transliterate character between character sets". Error code in
> the exception is 335544321. SQLSTATE 22000. It contains 3 errors:
> 1. type 1, error code 335544321, no message.
> 2. type 1, error code 335544565, no message.
> 3. type 0, error code 335544321, message "arithmetic exception, numeric
> overflow, or string truncation\r\nCannot transliterate character between
> character sets".
> 
> The database is created like this in isql:
> create database 'KorningarDev' user DEV password '***' page_size 4096
> set names 'UTF8' default character set UTF8 collation UNICODE;
> 
> And the connection string looks like this:
> Server=xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx;Port=3050;Database=KorningarDev;Charset=UTF8;User=DEV;Password=***
> 
> So, I see no reason why there would be any transliteratio problems:
> Windows unicode -> UTF8, and then UTF8 all the way, right?
> 
> Is this a bug, and would that bug be most likely in .NET FirebirdClient
> or in the FB engine? (I.e. where should I report it?)
> 
> Regards,
> Kjell Rilbe
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Posted by: Kjell Rilbe 
> 
> 
> ++
> 
> Visit http://www.firebirdsql.org and click the Documentation item
> on the main (top) menu.  Try FAQ and other links from the left-side menu 
> there.
> 
> Also search the knowledgebases at 
> http://www.ibphoenix.com/resources/documents/
> 
> ++
> 
> 
> Yahoo Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Mark Rotteveel

Re: ODP: [firebird-support] Using Union and Join (of two tables residing in different databases)in a Query

[Helen Borrie hele...@iinet.net.au [firebird-support]]

Antonio,

> I don't understand as you have been able to believe that I have treated
> a database as was a spreadsheet!!! I know what is a table, a database 
> (database as "set of tables", database as "file of type database"), a 
> relation, a key, an inedex, a... I've studied on your book.

> When I speak "to draw a table" for a program, I intend to set various 
> "tables" with the appropriate fields (name and type) and the 
> relationships with the fields of other "tables": so the database is the
> whole organized of these "tables" and relations. Right?

So far, so good.

> if it is not correct, I go to be a carpenter...
> else
> - a client ask me to write a program for a  single scope, the archives
> (the "tables" in the database!) must be able to contain the data related
> to that type of activity and I draw (create, write) a dabatase with the
> correct tables;

Yes, one client (Company A) one database

> - different clients ask me different types of programs: FOR ME, a 
> database must be created (drawn) for each type of program;

For everyone else, a database is created for each client organisation
(one database for Company A, one database for Company B, and so on.

> - two or more programs can have some identical "table" (e.g. 
> municipalities);
> - (1) I can create apart a unique database of "common tables" for the 
> "tables" used by all the programs;

The database for Company A should have all the tables used by the
users in Company A, including the low-volatility ones like your
Municipalities table.  If Comapny B needs Municipalities, it should
have its own copy.  You can create a DML script for this
low-volatility table and run it over each database;  or use a
replication tool if it is called for.

> (2) the same "table" can be repeated
> in all the databases;

That is what I referred to as "spreadsheet".  Those old-style desktop
fielsystems predated spreadsheets and lent themselves to that model of
application, due to explicit table locking.  That does not make it a
sensible or correct approach for a transactional RDBMS such as
Firebird.

> - it could be created an only database for all the programs; for every
> new program, new "tables" can be added in this unique database, while 
> the "table" existing can be used by the new program;

No, all tables should be available to all progrms and to one another.
If you have the same data in more than one table, you have redundancy,
the big enemy in data management. Related to this, if you are using
actual data as keys, you have intrinsic redundancy.

If you want to prevent certain USERs or ROLEs from accessing certain
tables, you use SQL privileges.

> - if you write dozens of programs (very small, normally, very great), 
> the only database becomes not manageable, *but it doesn't behave problems*.
> "not manageable" FOR ME as administration of the variations to the 
> single fields: Firebird is able of to manage millions of tables and 
> relationships, I can't, is its purpose!!

Firebird is designed to ensure the ACID rules (Atomicity, Consistency,
Isolation, Durability). it won't prevent you from breaking those rules
but it won't heal your wounded data for you, either.

> You pursue a purpose of general relations, that is the purpose of DBRMS;
> I pursue a purpose of management USING Firebird and its capability to 
> relate: it is not the same thing! FOR ME, naturally!!

Actually, every database is part of a management system of one kind or
another, so you are not alone in this world.  You can design a system
to store data according to rules and structures that make it safe and
smart: THAT is the purpose of a RDBMS.  Apparently, you want to follow
the spreadsheet model, in which a single set of data is exclusive to a
single application.  So - you maintain multiple instances of the same
data by hand and say your prayers.

>  From this my problem is born, but I can change my formulations.
> I need to think.

If you are unfamiliar with the ACID rules and normalization, look them up.

Helen


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[firebird-support] Question about multithread: readonly query in a single transaction

[Marco Andreolli dra...@gmail.com [firebird-support]]

Hi everybody,
I have a simple question, I would execute a query (select) in one separated
theread.

Is it safe run multiple (only select) query in separated thread using the
same transaction?
I should use a different transaction? or even different connection?

I'm a delphi developer and I use fbclient.dll and firebird 2.5

PS: fbclient.dll guarantee threading safe operations at transaction or
connection level?


Thanks in advance
Marco

RE: [firebird-support] Create sysdba user

['Paul Beach' pbe...@mail.ibphoenix.com [firebird-support]]

> I there an easy way to create another user with same privileges and can 
> access all tables as SYSDBA?

https://firebirdsql.org/rlsnotesh/rnfb25-admin.html

Paul

[firebird-support] ISQL connects with any credentials?

[Kjell Rilbe kjell.ri...@marknadsinformation.se [firebird-support]]

I just noticed that on my server I can connect to ANY database using ANY 
credentials, even with user names that don't exist. And for existing 
user name, it doesn't matter what password I specify - I can still 
connect and select from e.g. rdb$relations.

Why does this happen?

Mvh,
Kjell



Kjell Rilbe
Telefon: 08-761 06 55
Mobil: 0733-44 24 64

Marknadsinformation i Sverige AB
Ulvsundavägen 106C
168 67 Bromma
www.marknadsinformation.se 
08-514 905 90

Företagskontakt.se 
Personkontakt.se 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]