[firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
22.11.2012 14:35, Thomas Steinmaurer wrote: > I would say nullable compound indices, but Dmitry might have the > ultimate answer. ;-) Absolutely correct. Dmitry
Re: [firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
>> This is also possible, but only if you migrate not to the official >> v2.5.2 release but to some earlier snapshot build. >> >> Dmitry >> >> One question Dimitry. We have some quite large databases and cannot do a > backup restore cycle. Also rebuild indices may take so much time. > What kind of indices has to be rebuilded? > All? Compound indices? Compound indices with nullable fields? I would say nullable compound indices, but Dmitry might have the ultimate answer. ;-) > If not doing backup/restore, rebuild PK indices is complicated. The following used to work rebuilding a PK index: alter index active; The trick is to set the index active, even if it is already active. ;-) -- With regards, Thomas Steinmaurer http://www.upscene.com/
Re: [firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
> This is also possible, but only if you migrate not to the official > v2.5.2 release but to some earlier snapshot build. > > Dmitry > > One question Dimitry. We have some quite large databases and cannot do a backup restore cycle. Also rebuild indices may take so much time. What kind of indices has to be rebuilded? All? Compound indices? Compound indices with nullable fields? If not doing backup/restore, rebuild PK indices is complicated. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
22.11.2012 10:57, Maya Opperman wrote: > I thought I would only START to see the problem if I went from 2.5.1 to > 2.5.2 (without rebuilding). This is also possible, but only if you migrate not to the official v2.5.2 release but to some earlier snapshot build. Dmitry
RE: [firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
>> If you fail to do the rebuild, and you run into the bug, what actually >> happens? Do you get some kind of error message that can be recognised >> by my software, and added to to tell the end user what to do to fix it? >If you use that database with FB 2.5.1 or FB 2.5.2, then an error is thrown, >but you're unlikely to identify it uniquely (see >http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-3675). >If the database is used with FB 2.5.0 as well, the bug will bite you silently >(see http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-3853). Ah, thanks Dmitry, I misunderstood the release notes. I thought I would only START to see the problem if I went from 2.5.1 to 2.5.2 (without rebuilding). I didn't realise I would be experiencing it if I stayed on FB 2.5.1. ++ Visit http://www.firebirdsql.org and click the Resources item on the main (top) menu. Try Knowledgebase and FAQ links ! Also search the knowledgebases at http://www.ibphoenix.com ++ Yahoo! Groups Links
[firebird-support] Re: RES: Version number
22.11.2012 9:46, Maya Opperman wrote: > > If you fail to do the rebuild, and you run into the bug, what actually > happens? Do you get some kind of error message that can be recognised by > my software, and added to to tell the end user what to do to fix it? If you use that database with FB 2.5.1 or FB 2.5.2, then an error is thrown, but you're unlikely to identify it uniquely (see http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-3675). If the database is used with FB 2.5.0 as well, the bug will bite you silently (see http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-3853). Dmitry
