[firebird-support] How to build up TPB with IXpbBuilder properly?

Hi All, The second code fragment works like a charm (the transaction started properly with the given parametes). The first not and return this error message: "invalid format for transaction parameter block -wrong version of transaction parameter block" What's wrong with the IXpbBuilder? *1*

[firebird-support] How to test performance of 3.0?

Hi All, I would like to know how it performs with Debian 8, Ubuntu 16.04 and CentOS 7. Any easy and free solution exist for this test? Gabor ++ Visit

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

Hi All, I would like to thank everyone who helped me on this subject. Dmitry committed the fix on Saturday. No more deadlock for me! :-) http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5222 https://github.com/FirebirdSQL/firebird/commit/5f0842ba2c51b4bfb2e2c4191e4aa742ad5cb470 Gabor

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

Hi Thomas, > I don't see deadlocks with the following test case. Thank you very much for the test case! > No gaps, no deadlock messages, no pk/unique violation in the log table etc ... Same for me. Got deadlock if try with NO RECORD VERSION. > It is crucial that accessing the central

Re: [firebird-support] Re: SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

2016. 04. 28. 17:18 keltezéssel, Dmitry Yemanov dim...@users.sourceforge.net [firebird-support] írta: > 28.04.2016 16:19, Gabor Boros wrote: > >> In the language reference for "isc_tpb_read_committed + isc_tpb_wait" I >> see this: "Update conflict exceptions can never be raised by an explicit >>

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

2016. 04. 28. 17:46 keltezéssel, Thomas Steinmaurer t...@iblogmanager.com [firebird-support] írta: > What happens if you are running Read Committed WITH record version? No error with 10 concurrently instances of the test app (2 SQL lines (SELECT ... WITH LOCK and UPDATE ...)). But failing with

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

2016. 04. 28. 13:36 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > 28.04.2016 13:30, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >> Now 3 instances enough to got deadlock after some time. > >Are you sure that error you g

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

2016. 04. 28. 14:55 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > 28.04.2016 13:41, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >> The message is: >> deadlock >> update conflicts with concurrent update >> co

Re: [firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

2016. 04. 28. 13:36 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > 28.04.2016 13:30, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >> Now 3 instances enough to got deadlock after some time. > >Are you sure that error you g

[firebird-support] SELECT WITH LOCK, WAIT transaction, deadlock

Hi All, I tested the WITH LOCK feature in July of 2014 with 3.0 and a simple application and works like a charm. Now I want to use it in production but the same test app give deadlocks. The database contains one table with one row and a BIGINT field increased by 1 500 times by the test app.

Re: [firebird-support] Backup with admin rights is prohibited?

2016. 04. 25. 13:27 keltezéssel, 'Thomas Steinmaurer' t...@iblogmanager.com [firebird-support] írta: You forgot to mention role ADMIN in the command line. >>> >>> With "gbak -B -T -USER MYADMIN -ROLE RDB$ADMIN MYDB /home/user/MYDB.bak" >>> got the same error. >> >> Other idea? > >

Re: [firebird-support] Backup with admin rights is prohibited?

2016. 04. 22. 15:57 keltezéssel, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] írta: > 2016. 04. 22. 15:37 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com > [firebird-support] írta: >> 22.04.2016 15:34, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >>

Re: [firebird-support] Backup with admin rights is prohibited?

2016. 04. 22. 15:37 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > 22.04.2016 15:34, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >> Now tried to do a backup (gbak -B -T >> -USER MYADMIN MYDB /home/user/MYDB.bak) and gbak say &quo

[firebird-support] Backup with admin rights is prohibited?

Hi All, I have a 3.0 database with self security database. Use an admin user (CREATE USER MYADMIN PASSWORD 'mypassword' GRANT ADMIN ROLE;) for daily admin work without any problem. Now tried to do a backup (gbak -B -T -USER MYADMIN MYDB /home/user/MYDB.bak) and gbak say "You must be either

Re: [firebird-support] How to skip a trigger in the same trigger?

2016. 04. 14. 14:00 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > 14.04.2016 13:57, Gabor Boros gaborbo...@yahoo.com [firebird-support] wrote: >> I have TBL_MASTER, TBL_DETAIL(this contains ISDEFAULT). You suggest a >> TBL_DETAIL_DEFAULTS table

Re: [firebird-support] How to skip a trigger in the same trigger?

2016. 04. 14. 13:27 keltezéssel, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > You'd better to remove IsDefault field at all and create a reference to > default record > in other table. I have TBL_MASTER, TBL_DETAIL(this contains ISDEFAULT). You suggest a

Re: [firebird-support] How to skip a trigger in the same trigger?

2016. 04. 14. 13:09 keltezéssel, 'Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions)' m.ton...@upscene.com [firebird-support] írta: > Hi, > > First question: why do you have an UPDATE in a BEFORE UPDATE > trigger on ? The table have many fields and a UNIQUE constraint with four fields, one the ISDEFAULT

[firebird-support] How to skip a trigger in the same trigger?

Hi All, I have a BEFORE UPDATE trigger for MYTABLE1 with an IF ... UPDATE MYTABLE1 and after an IF ... INSERT INTO MYTABLE2 in it. If the UPDATE MYTABLE1 executed the trigger fire himself and the INSERT executed twice. How to skip it? RDB$SET_CONTEXT/RDB$GET_CONTEXT is a good solution? I

Re: [firebird-support] VIEW optimization

2016. 04. 07. 21:41 keltezéssel, Ann Harrison aharri...@ibphoenix.com [firebird-support] írta: > You're thinking of a case where there is a (possibly unstated) referential > relationship between the table that you're getting fields from and the other > table in the view. The table you're getting

Re: [firebird-support] VIEW optimization

2016. 04. 07. 19:31 keltezéssel, 'Mark Rotteveel' m...@lawinegevaar.nl [firebird-support] írta: > > > For a join (inner join), the rows must exist in both tables, so both > tables need to be evaluated. > > Mark I understand this. Try describe my problem with other words. Is the VIEW an atomic

Re: [firebird-support] VIEW optimization

2016. 04. 07. 18:48 keltezéssel, 'Mark Rotteveel' m...@lawinegevaar.nl [firebird-support] írta: > Why wouldn't it be necessary, this is an inner join, so the joined table > needs to be evaluated if the matches row is present. > > SELECT RDB$FIELD_NAME FROM VIEW1 SELECT RDB$FIELD_NAME FROM

[firebird-support] VIEW optimization

Hi All, VIEW: CREATE VIEW VIEW1 AS SELECT RDB$RELATION_FIELDS.RDB$RELATION_NAME, RDB$FIELD_NAME FROM RDB$RELATION_FIELDS JOIN RDB$RELATIONS ON RDB$RELATION_FIELDS.RDB$RELATION_NAME=RDB$RELATIONS.RDB$RELATION_NAME; SELECT: SELECT RDB$FIELD_NAME FROM VIEW1 PLAN: PLAN JOIN (VIEW1

Re: [firebird-support] Interbase 5.6 (Windows 98) not available on network

2015.11.11. 13:10 keltezéssel, Virgo Pärna virgo.pa...@mail.ee [firebird-support] írta: > It is offtopic question, but I dont really know where to ask > and here are probably people, who know someting about older Interbase > versions too.

Re: [firebird-support] About firebird performance

2015.09.05. 9:00 keltezéssel, Hector Sánchez hec...@planatec.es [firebird-support] írta: > - I have a linux server with firebird 2.5.4 Superserver: multi-core (4), 3GB > RAM Hi, Can you test with 3.0 (Beta 2 or snapshot)? Gabor

Re: [firebird-support] Firebird Roadmap: v3.0 - what's next?

2015.04.15. 8:58 keltezéssel, Schwarze Consulting - Michael Schwarze michael.schwa...@schwarze-consulting.de [firebird-support] írta: Hi, Just out of curiosity: what’s coming after Firebird v3.0? I checked the upcoming roadmap [1] and was wondering whether there might be any NoSQL ideas,