Re: [firebird-support] Problems with database events

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

Hello Sandris,

Thursday, March 2, 2017, 5:24:03 AM, you wrote:

> Hello!


> Error occurs if i am trying to register database events using 3.0.2. 
> fbclient.dll to firebird 3.0.2. on linux.


> "Failed to establish a secondary connection for event processing."


> No error if server is on windows or server is on linux and using 2.5 client.

It is likely to be a firewall issue.  In firebird.conf:

#
# The TCP Port Number to be used for server Event Notification
# messages.  The value of 0 (Zero) means that the server will choose
# a port number randomly.
#
# Type: integer
#
#RemoteAuxPort = 0

So you will need to open a port (recommend a high number, e.g., 13050)
in the firewall of your Linux host and apply that number to
RemoteAuxPort.  Don't forget to restart the server after saving the
config.

If that doesn't work, you could post a Tracker ticket to have it
looked at before Fb 3.0.2 is released.

HB

[firebird-support] Falling server FireBird

[an...@bk.ru [firebird-support]]

FireBirdCS-2.5.5.26952
Intel® Core™ i7-2600 Quad-Core inkl. - 4 ядра, 32 GB DDR3 RAM, 2 x 3 TB 6 Gb/s 
HDD SATA3
Debian 6 Squeeze 64 bit 
Work the database is on a separate 250 GB 6 Gb/s SSD

At last week in log this messages:

 

 

 
servTue Feb 28 05:13:13 2017
Pthread Error
operating system directive pthread_mutex_destroy(event-> event_mutex) failed
Device or resource busy

serv (Client)Tue Feb 28 05:13:13 2017
/opt/firebird/bin/fbguard: /opt/firebird/bin/fb_smp_ server terminated 
abnormally (-1)

serv (Client)Tue Feb 28 05:13:14 2017
/opt/firebird/bin/fbguard: guardian starting /opt/firebird/bin/fb_smp_ 
server

serv (Client)Tue Feb 28 05:13:14 2017
INET/inet_error: connect errno = 111

serv (Client)Tue Feb 28 05:16:58 2017
REMOTE INTERFACE/gds__detach: Unsuccesful detach from database. 
Uncommitted work may have been lost
 

 

This was set up to 2.5.0 from official depository of Debian, was errors:

 

 
serv (Client)Sat Feb 25 03:57:41 2017
INET/inet_error: read errno = 104

serv (Client)Sat Feb 25 03:57:41 2017
REMOTE INTERFACE/gds__detach: Unsuccesful detach from database. 
Uncommitted work may have been lost

 
 

 Support of DataCenter reported a large load on the local drives, installed SSD 
drive and move database on this drive

Make a full system test - normally say it.

Reinstalled 2.5.0 on 2.5.5. - errors are less likely, but it's still left.

What to do at least tell me :-(
 

[firebird-support] Problems with database events

[Sandris sand...@solcraft.lv [firebird-support]]

Hello!


Error occurs if i am trying to register database events using 3.0.2. 
fbclient.dll to firebird 3.0.2. on linux.


"Failed to establish a secondary connection for event processing."


No error if server is on windows or server is on linux and using 2.5 client.

Re: [firebird-support] Transactions isolation levels and collisions

[Aldo Caruso aldo.car...@argencasas.com [firebird-support]]

Ann,

thank you very much for your answer.

Aldo


El 01/03/17 a las 11:44, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com 
[firebird-support] escribió:


On Mar 1, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Aldo Caruso wrote:


Ann,

  Thanks for your detailed answer.

But this leads me to the following question: If snapshot 
transactions have their own copy of the Transaction Inventory Pages ( 
TIP ), taken when the transaction started, transaction A couldn't see 
the state of transaction B or transaction C ( because they are not in 
this copy ).


So I guess that snapshot transactions use its own copy of TIP for 
reading ( selects ), but when it comes to updates or deletes, in 
order to search for collisions, they should also access the global 
shared TIP.





Not exactly.  A snapshot transaction has a copy of rhe relevant 
section of the TIP as of the time it starts. Transactions started 
later alway count as "active" because they could not have committed 
before the started.


When a snapshot transaction tries to update a record and finds that 
the most recent version was created by a transaction that was active 
or unknown according to its copy of the TIP, it attempts to take a 
lock on that transaction's id.


Every transaction holds an exclusive lock on its id until it ends. 
 When the lock is granted to the waiting transaction, it knows that 
the other transaction has ended and asks the transaction management 
module for the final state of the dead transaction.


Good luck,

Ann

Re: [firebird-support] Transactions isolation levels and collisions

[Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support]]

> On Mar 1, 2017, at 9:53 AM, Aldo Caruso wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Ann,
> 
>   Thanks for your detailed answer.
> 
> But this leads me to the following question: If snapshot transactions 
> have their own copy of the Transaction Inventory Pages ( TIP ), taken when 
> the transaction started, transaction A couldn't see the state of transaction 
> B or transaction C ( because they are not in this copy ).
> 
> So I guess that snapshot transactions use its own copy of TIP for reading 
> ( selects ), but when it comes to updates or deletes, in order to search for 
> collisions, they should also access the global shared TIP.
> 


Not exactly.  A snapshot transaction has a copy of rhe relevant section of the 
TIP as of the time it starts. Transactions started later alway count as 
"active" because they could not have committed before the started.  

When a snapshot transaction tries to update a record and finds that the most 
recent version was created by a transaction that was active or unknown 
according to its copy of the TIP, it attempts to take a lock on that 
transaction's id. 

Every transaction holds an exclusive lock on its id until it ends.  When the 
lock is granted to the waiting transaction, it knows that the other transaction 
has ended and asks the transaction management module for the final state of the 
dead transaction.  

Good luck,

Ann
> 

Re: [firebird-support] Transactions isolation levels and collisions

[Aldo Caruso aldo.car...@argencasas.com [firebird-support]]

Ann,

  Thanks for your detailed answer.

  I agree with you: the only isolation level which each transaction 
takes care of is its own isolation level. So this behavior happens 
because A isolation level is snapshot ( regardless of the isolation 
level of B or C ).


Also I suspected your last conclusion: Firebird only checks the 
most recent record version.


But this leads me to the following question: If snapshot 
transactions have their own copy of the Transaction Inventory Pages ( 
TIP ), taken when the transaction started, transaction A couldn't see 
the state of transaction B or transaction C ( because they are not in 
this copy ).


So I guess that snapshot transactions use its own copy of TIP for 
reading ( selects ), but when it comes to updates or deletes, in order 
to search for collisions, they should also access the global shared TIP.


Is that true ?

Aldo




El 01/03/17 a las 09:29, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com 
[firebird-support] escribió:



> On Feb 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Aldo Caruso wrote:
>
> I'm trying to understand interactions between transactions with
> different isolation levels.

The problem is not mixed isolation levels. You would get the same 
behavior if all transactions were Snapshot


The scenario (described below in detail) is

Start transaction A

Start transaction B

B updates some record

B commits

Start transaction C

C updates the same record

A attempts to update that record and waits for C to end

Whatever C dies A will fail because of a conflict with C if C commits 
or a conflict with B if C rolls back. Why doesn't A just fail immediately?


The answer is that Firebird checks only the most recent record version 
for conflicts. Checking the next back version would avoid having A 
wait in this case but would require more reading in general.


Good luck,

Ann

>
> My environment is Firebird Super Server 2.5 (v. 2.5.2) on Linux
> Ubuntu 14.04
>
> I'm testing by opening two consoles and running isql-fb on both 
consoles.

>
> On the first one I start a SNAPSHOT transaction ( lets call it
> transaction A ).
>
> Afterwards, on the second console, I start another transaction with a
> READ COMMITTED RECORD_VERSION isolation level ( lets call it 
transaction

> B ).
>
> In transaction B, I update a record X and commit the transaction.
>
> In the same second console I start a third transaction, also READ
> COMMITTED RECORD_VERSION ( lets call it transaction C ).
>
> In transaction C, I update record X, but neither commit it nor roll it
> back ( transaction C remains active ).
>
> On the first console, in transaction A, I update record X and it
> obviously waits for a commit or a rollback of transaction C.
>
> Back on the second console, in transaction C, I roll it back.
>
> Not surprisingly, on the first console, transaction A ends waiting with
> a collision error, because although transaction C rolled back,
> transaction B, that had started after transaction A, had made an update
> and committed it. As the isolation level of transaction A was SNAPSHOT,
> it finds a collision and so an error is risen.
>
> So we have the following situation:
>
> If transaction C ends rolling back (as in the example), transaction A
> raises an error because of the collision with the previous transaction
> that touched and committed the record ( transaction B ).
>
> If transaction C ends committing, transaction A also raises an error
> because of the collision with transaction C.
>
> Whichever way transaction C ends ( committing or rolling back ), the
> waiting update in transaction A is aborted with an error message 
because

> of a collision.
>
> The question is which was the point of waiting in transaction A for the
> end of transaction C ? Why didn't it raise an error in the same 
moment I

> tried to do an update in transaction A ? Couldn't it foresee that the
> record was previously updated by a committed transaction B, which
> started after the SNAPSHOT transaction A, and so whichever the outcome
> of C were there would be a collision ?
>
> Note also that if in the example above, we wouldn't have started
> transaction C, transaction A would raise an error as soon as it 
tried to

> update the record that was updated and committed by B ( I tested it ).
>
> Thanks for any answer.
>
> Aldo Caruso
>
>
>
>
> 
> Posted by: Aldo Caruso 
> 
>
> ++
>
> 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
>
>
>

Re: [firebird-support] Firebird 2.5 classic performance issue on linux64

[Alexey Kovyazin a...@ib-aid.com [firebird-support]]

Hi Andreas,

I think the main thing is

   * blockdev -setfra 32768  - this has nothing to do with
 firebird but speeds up reads in the RAID array quite a bit. Thanks
 to wltjr on IRC.

and, probably, backup/restore.

In 2.5 the bad effect of autosweep is almost eliminated on the systems 
with low and moderate writes.

Regards,
Alexey Kovyazin


> Hi guys,
>
> I'm just responding one more time because I want to mark this as solved
> for me:
>
> Several things did the trick:
>
>* Upgrade Firebird to 2.5.7 (apparently there was a subquery bug in
>  2.5.4 which wasn't fixed in the debian package) - thanks to LiENUS
>  on IRC.
>* blockdev -setfra 32768  - this has nothing to do with
>  firebird but speeds up reads in the RAID array quite a bit. Thanks
>  to wltjr on IRC.
>* switching to manual sweeping over automatic and transaction-based
>* doing a complete gbak backup/restore one more time to re-index
>* tweaking xinetd (flags = REUSE NODELAY)
>
> Tweaking a system for firebird is a little bit different from tweaking
> it for other databases, because firebird uses one huge file and not
> several of them scattered all over the filesystem. Not judging, just
> saying it's a different approach :)
>
> Maybe I'll write something up on our blog for this so people can more
> easily find the bottlenecks. This took me two weeks of research and a
> lot of asking around. One simple best-practice howto would have saved me :)
>
> If anyone cares, I will write this down as an optimized firebird linux
> setup from start to finish and run this by you guys. Most of the howtos
> and optimization resources I could find focus on Windows (CPUAffinity
> tweaks, etc.) - and I'd like to help people out who want to skip the
> windows section :)
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Andreas
>
>   
>
>
> On 28.02.2017 00:33, 'Leyne, Sean' s...@broadviewsoftware.com
> [firebird-support] wrote:
>>   
>>
>> Andreas,
>>
>>   
>>
>>   
>>
>> this is the one thing I am getting when I am connecting to the
>> database. I am not the one working productively on the system, so I
>> can't really tell wether this has become faster or is still the same.
>>
>> LOCK_HEADER BLOCK
>>  Version: 145, Active owner:  0, Length: 7048576, Used: 540536
>>  Flags: 0x0001
>>  Enqs:   5031, Converts:113, Rejects:  8, Blocks: 11
>>  Deadlock scans:  0, Deadlocks:  0, Scan interval:  10
>>  Acquires:   7695, Acquire blocks:  3, Spin count:   0
>>  Mutex wait: 0.0%
>>  Hash slots: 30011, Hash lengths (min/avg/max):0/   0/   4
>>  Remove node:  0, Insert queue:  0, Insert prior:  0
>>  Owners (3):forward: 252920, backward: 490968
>>  Free owners: *empty*
>>  Free locks (5):forward: 254960, backward: 519480
>>  Free requests (6):forward: 540344, backward: 403464
>>  Lock Ordering: Enabled
>>
>> This is what the fb_lock_print output looks like.
>>
>>  Those numbers look to be very good.
>>
>>  Q: Why are you running Classic server?  How many
>> users/connections are there usually to the database?
>>
>>  Perhaps SuperServer provide better performance – it would allow
>> you to “blow up” the page cache size.
>>
>>   
>>
>>







++

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] Transactions isolation levels and collisions

[Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support]]

> On Feb 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Aldo Caruso wrote:
> 
>   I'm trying to understand interactions between transactions with 
> different isolation levels.

The problem is not mixed isolation levels. You would get the same behavior if 
all transactions were Snapshot

The scenario (described below in detail) is

Start transaction A

Start transaction B

B updates some record

B commits

Start transaction C

C updates the same record

A attempts to update that record and waits for C to end

Whatever C dies A will fail because of a conflict with C if C commits or a 
conflict with B if C rolls back.  Why doesn't A just fail immediately?

The answer is that Firebird checks only the most recent record version for 
conflicts.  Checking the next back version would avoid having A wait in this 
case but would require more reading in general. 

Good luck,

Ann


> 
>   My environment is Firebird Super Server 2.5 (v. 2.5.2) on Linux 
> Ubuntu 14.04
> 
>   I'm testing by opening two consoles and running isql-fb on both consoles.
> 
> On the first one I start a SNAPSHOT transaction ( lets call it 
> transaction A ).
> 
> Afterwards, on the second console, I start another transaction with a 
> READ COMMITTED RECORD_VERSION isolation level ( lets call it transaction 
> B ).
> 
> In transaction B, I update a record X and commit the transaction.
> 
> In the same second console I start a third transaction, also READ 
> COMMITTED RECORD_VERSION ( lets call it transaction C ).
> 
> In transaction C, I update record X, but neither commit it nor roll it 
> back ( transaction C remains active ).
> 
> On the first console, in transaction A, I update record X and it 
> obviously waits for a commit or a rollback of transaction C.
> 
> Back on the second console, in transaction C, I roll it back.
> 
> Not surprisingly, on the first console, transaction A ends waiting with 
> a collision error, because although transaction C rolled back, 
> transaction B, that had started after transaction A, had made an update 
> and committed it. As the isolation level of transaction A was SNAPSHOT, 
> it finds a collision and so an error is risen.
> 
> So we have the following situation:
> 
> If transaction C ends rolling back (as in the example), transaction A 
> raises an error because of the collision with the previous transaction 
> that touched and committed the record ( transaction B ).
> 
> If transaction C ends committing, transaction A also raises an error 
> because of the collision with transaction C.
> 
> Whichever way transaction C ends ( committing or rolling back ), the 
> waiting update in transaction A is aborted with an error message because 
> of a collision.
> 
> The question is which was the point of waiting in transaction A for the 
> end of transaction C ? Why didn't it raise an error in the same moment I 
> tried to do an update in transaction A ? Couldn't it foresee that the 
> record was previously updated by a committed transaction B, which 
> started after the SNAPSHOT transaction A, and so whichever the outcome 
> of C were there would be a collision ?
> 
> Note also that if in the example above, we wouldn't have started 
> transaction C, transaction A would raise an error as soon as it tried to 
> update the record that was updated and committed by B ( I tested it ).
> 
> Thanks for any answer.
> 
> Aldo Caruso
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Posted by: Aldo Caruso 
> 
> 
> ++
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 

Re: [firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

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

On 2017-03-01 09:59, Dmitry Yemanov dim...@users.sourceforge.net 
[firebird-support] wrote:
> 01.03.2017 11:58, jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk wrote:
> 
>> OK, I have working Firebird 3.0.1 installation and I have copied
>> security3.fdb from the broken Firebird installation and now I am also
>> receiving the error message. So - security3.fdb is somehow broken,
>> problem is in security3.fdb
> 
> It's not broken, it just misses SYSDBA account.

That is not entirely true: the security database is not initialized for 
SRP, creating a user (any user) with the SRP user manager should be 
enough. If I recall correctly that initialization doesn't automatically 
create a SYSDBA account (but I can't check right now).

Mark

Re: [firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

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

On 2017-03-01 11:41, jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support] 
wrote:
> Solution found - I had to use the "create user" command with the
> "using" clause:
> SQL> create user SYSDBA password 'masterkey' using plugin Srp;
> 
> My firebird.cong indicated that Legacy_Auth is the first (default)
> user manager and it was necessary for isql to know that Srp manager
> had to be used:
> UserManager = Legacy_Auth, Srp
> 
> So - my conclusions about the improvement of the Firebird Release
> notes:
> p.119 of the PDF document contains important notice:
> "This initialization is not required and should NOT be performed if
> you have configured the server to use legacy
> (pre-Firebird 3 style) authentication and user management."
> Actually this is not true! Clients want to check 'Enable authorization
> for legacy Firebird clients' and they want to use Firebird 3
> gds32.dll/fbclient.dll and in such cases the initialization is
> required.
> 
> p.119 also provides the example of create user command. It could be
> helpful to add note about "using" clause. Without such notice the
> initialization procedure can not be completed as described.

Those instructions work if the UserManager setting is left with the 
default (so that the SRP user manager is first), otherwise you have to 
explicitly state which plugin needs to be used to create the user.

Mark

Re: [firebird-support] How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

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

On 2017-03-01 09:34, jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support] 
wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Our client has Firebird 3.0 super server installation which has the
> following behaviour:
> - Client software (e.g. Flamerobin) can establish connection using
> Firebird 2.x fbclient.dll
> - When client software (e.g. Flamerobin) tries to connect using
> Firebird 3.x fbclient.dll then the error message appears and then
> connection is not established:
> engine code : 335545029 engine message: install incomplete, please
> read the compatibility chapter in the release notes for this version
> 
> fbirebird.cong contains these entries:
> AuthServer = Legacy_Auth, Srp, Win_Sspi
> AuthClient = Legacy_Auth, Srp, Win_Sspi
> UserManager = Legacy_Auth, Srp
> 
> WireCrypt = Enabled
> 
> That is OK.
> 
> As far as I can understand, then this situation indicates that new
> authorization system is broken on the server. How to check new
> authorization system and how to repair it. As far as I can understand
> th en firbird.conf is correct. Maybe ebedded connection to
> security3.fdb is required and some repairs should be done there?
> 
> Of course, our client can reinstall server (and he will do it), but it
> would be nice to understand how such broken installation happen and
> what to do in such cases?

The problem you are having is 
http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5485

With the configuration given it should work in theory, but as the 
fbclient.dll used is probably the one from Windows System32 (or 
SysWOW64), you need to make sure it has its own copy of firebird.conf 
with the relevant configuration.

Mark

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

Solution found - I had to use the "create user" command with the "using" clause:
SQL> create user SYSDBA password 'masterkey' using plugin Srp;

My firebird.cong indicated that Legacy_Auth is the first (default) user manager 
and it was necessary for isql to know that Srp manager had to be used:
UserManager = Legacy_Auth, Srp

So - my conclusions about the improvement of the Firebird Release notes:
p.119 of the PDF document contains important notice:
"This initialization is not required and should NOT be performed if you have 
configured the server to use legacy
(pre-Firebird 3 style) authentication and user management."
Actually this is not true! Clients want to check 'Enable authorization for 
legacy Firebird clients' and they want to use Firebird 3 gds32.dll/fbclient.dll 
and in such cases the initialization is required.

p.119 also provides the example of create user command. It could be helpful to 
add note about "using" clause. Without such notice the initialization procedure 
can not be completed as described.

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

isql allowed to change the password of the SYSDBA account but that did not 
removed original error message about "installation incomplete"...

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

OK - I am starting to understand. Apparently client had Firebird default 
instance Windows registry entry from the Firebird installations of the previous 
versions. That is why Firebird 3.0 installation wizard did not displayed 
extended configuration form with the possibility to initialize security3 
database and create SYSDBA account. So - it might be possible that I should 
execute steps from the Firebird 3.0 release notes "Initializing the Security 
Database".

However, something is still broken. My initialization session ended with error:
C:\Program Files\Firebird\Firebird_3_0>isql -user sysdba employee
Database: employee, User: SYSDBA
SQL> create user SYSDBA password 'masterkey';
Statement failed, SQLSTATE = 23000
add record error
-violation of PRIMARY or UNIQUE KEY constraint "INTEG_2" on table "PLG$USERS"
-Problematic key value is ("PLG$USER_NAME" = 'SYSDBA')
SQL>

So - it reports that SYSDBA account is present!

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[Dmitry Yemanov dim...@users.sourceforge.net [firebird-support]]

01.03.2017 11:37, jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk wrote:

> Actually, I don't understand this thing about old and new authorization
> system. Does it mean that there are two SYSDBA and other user accounts -
> one for old and other for new authorization system and does it mean that
> there are two sets of passwords?

Exactly.


Dmitry

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[Dmitry Yemanov dim...@users.sourceforge.net [firebird-support]]

01.03.2017 11:58, jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk wrote:

> OK, I have working Firebird 3.0.1 installation and I have copied
> security3.fdb from the broken Firebird installation and now I am also
> receiving the error message. So - security3.fdb is somehow broken,
> problem is in security3.fdb

It's not broken, it just misses SYSDBA account.


Dmitry

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

OK, I have working Firebird 3.0.1 installation and I have copied security3.fdb 
from the broken Firebird installation and now I am also receiving the error 
message. So - security3.fdb is somehow broken, problem is in security3.fdb

[firebird-support] Re: How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

Actually, I don't understand this thing about old and new authorization system. 
Does it mean that there are two SYSDBA and other user accounts - one for old 
and other for new authorization system and does it mean that there are two sets 
of passwords?

Is it safe to check 'Enable authorization for legacy Firebird clients?' during 
installations - is it right that this check only adds new capabilites and does 
not broke any original capabilities?

[firebird-support] How to check and (possibly) repair new authorization system on Firebird 3.0.1

[jonatan.laurit...@yahoo.dk [firebird-support]]

Hi!

Our client has Firebird 3.0 super server installation which has the following 
behaviour:
- Client software (e.g. Flamerobin) can establish connection using Firebird 2.x 
fbclient.dll
- When client software (e.g. Flamerobin) tries to connect using Firebird 3.x 
fbclient.dll then the error message appears and then connection is not 
established:
engine code : 335545029 engine message: install incomplete, please read the 
compatibility chapter in the release notes for this version

fbirebird.cong contains these entries:
 AuthServer = Legacy_Auth, Srp, Win_Sspi
AuthClient = Legacy_Auth, Srp, Win_Sspi
UserManager = Legacy_Auth, Srp

 WireCrypt = Enabled 

 That is OK.
 

 As far as I can understand, then this situation indicates that new 
authorization system is broken on the server. How to check new authorization 
system and how to repair it. As far as I can understand then firbird.conf is 
correct. Maybe ebedded connection to security3.fdb is required and some repairs 
should be done there?
 

 Of course, our client can reinstall server (and he will do it), but it would 
be nice to understand how such broken installation happen and what to do in 
such cases?