Hello Robbert-Jan,
Thanks, that does the trick.
All in all: packages are great stuff.
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
Upscene Productions
From: Robbert-Jan
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 5:13 PM
To: For discussion among Firebird Developers
Subject: Re: [Firebird-devel] Beta 1: recreating
pa
>> (which reminds me: I had no idea how to create a secondary user database
>> which is why I copied the server wide one into another location)
>
>To make any database a security one you should make appropriate changes
>in databases.conf, connect to it in embedded mode as sysdba and execute
>CREATE
>28.10.2014 17:19, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
>> And "other non default" would be a few databases using a single secondary
>> security database?
>
> There is no such thing as a "secondary security database".
Potato potato...
---
On 10/28/14 19:53, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 17:48, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> Should be:
>> security.db = $(dir_secDb)/security3.fdb
> I wonder why it isn't "security3.fdb = $(dir_secDb)/security3.fdb".
To be able later in any version have embedded connections to it as
"security.db
28.10.2014 17:48, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> Should be:
> security.db = $(dir_secDb)/security3.fdb
I wonder why it isn't "security3.fdb = $(dir_secDb)/security3.fdb".
At first I though that you changed hardcoded security DB name and this is
the way to be
backward compatible...
--
WBR, SD.
On 10/28/14 19:37, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 17:34, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>>> BTW, what declaration of "security.fdb" in default databases.conf is
>>> for?
>> To make it use small cache (saves memory when default one is big) and
>> avoid remote connections to it.
> Why it is
28.10.2014 19:37, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> Why it is "security.fdb", not "security3.fdb" then?..
Actually, it's "security.db", not "security.fdb" ;-)
security.db = $(dir_secDb)/security3.fdb
Dmitry
--
Firebird-Dev
28.10.2014 17:34, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> BTW, what declaration of "security.fdb" in default databases.conf is
>> for?
>> >
> To make it use small cache (saves memory when default one is big) and
> avoid remote connections to it.
Why it is "security.fdb", not "security3.fdb" then?..
--
On 10/28/14 19:31, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 17:27, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>> Other = everything neither self nor security3.fdb.
> BTW, what declaration of "security.fdb" in default databases.conf is for?
>
To make it use small cache (saves memory when default one is big) and
avoi
On 10/28/14 19:19, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
> Hello Dmitry,
>
>>> MON$SEC_DATABASE_USED
>>> values: "DEFAULT" / "SECONDARY"
>> Maybe "DEFAULT", "SELF", "OTHER"?
>>
>> I may imagine cases when EUA and "other-non-default" dbs should be
>> distinguished.
> What would "self" mean? Ar
28.10.2014 17:27, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> Other = everything neither self nor security3.fdb.
BTW, what declaration of "security.fdb" in default databases.conf is for?
--
WBR, SD.
--
Firebird-Devel mailing list, we
28.10.2014 19:19, Martijn Tonies wrote:
>
> What would "self" mean? Are the security tables inside the database
> you're connecting to?
Self = EUA. Not just having security tables but actually known to be
authenticated using them while connecting.
> And "other non default" would be a few databas
28.10.2014 17:19, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
> And "other non default" would be a few databases using a single secondary
> security database?
There is no such thing as a "secondary security database".
--
WBR, SD.
---
Hello Dmitry,
>> MON$SEC_DATABASE_USED
>> values: "DEFAULT" / "SECONDARY"
>
>Maybe "DEFAULT", "SELF", "OTHER"?
>
>I may imagine cases when EUA and "other-non-default" dbs should be
>distinguished.
What would "self" mean? Are the security tables inside the database
you're connecting to?
(which r
28.10.2014 19:06, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> MON$SEC_DATABASE_USED
> values: "DEFAULT" / "SECONDARY"
Maybe "DEFAULT", "SELF", "OTHER"?
I may imagine cases when EUA and "other-non-default" dbs should be
distinguished.
Dmitry
--
Hi,
@Martijn
I didnt know you could use private routines without declaring them at the
beginning of your package body source (I just followed the “simple package
example” of page 63 of the alpha2 Release Notes).
But as long as you call them after implementation, it appears to be okay.
Thanks fo
On 10/28/14 18:58, Philippe Makowski wrote:
> Le 28/10/14 16:34, Paul Reeves a écrit :
>> Sorry - what I meant was that the project is no longer going to supply
>> binaries for linux and users should get them from their distro.
>>
> You mean no longer provide rpm, but certainly still provide binari
On 10/28/14 19:01, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 18:55, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>
>> What if I also add that info not to SEC$USERS but to MON$DATABASE?
> No problem, but what is that "info"? Name of the security db or what?
>
> I'm asking because we had plans to introduce all config settings (act
>> What if I also add that info not to SEC$USERS but to MON$DATABASE?
>
>No problem, but what is that "info"? Name of the security db or what?
Hurray!
A column saying anything along the lines of "this is a secondary user
database" is fine.
MON$SEC_DATABASE_USED
values: "DEFAULT" / "SECONDARY"
?
On 10/28/14 18:34, Paul Reeves wrote:
>
There, we are
planning to move towards distro-specific packages and afaict, multiple
installs are just not possible at the moment.
>> Both mentioned "facts" are new for me.
>>
>> Why should _we_ move towards distro-specific packages?
> Sorry -
28.10.2014 18:55, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> What if I also add that info not to SEC$USERS but to MON$DATABASE?
No problem, but what is that "info"? Name of the security db or what?
I'm asking because we had plans to introduce all config settings (actual
to this database) via a new MON$ table. So S
Le 28/10/14 16:34, Paul Reeves a écrit :
> Sorry - what I meant was that the project is no longer going to supply
> binaries for linux and users should get them from their distro.
>
You mean no longer provide rpm, but certainly still provide binaries in
tar.gz, no ?
> Systemd? It seems to me th
>> I understand that using mon$ tables could be better but afraid for FB3
>> time for such changes is gone.
>
>Feel free to modify SEC$USERS, if needed. I'm likely to commit changes
>for MON$ tables before Beta 2 as well.
I think MON$DATABASE would make more sense.
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
On 10/28/14 18:50, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 18:28, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>
>> I understand that using mon$ tables could be better but afraid for FB3
>> time for such changes is gone.
> Feel free to modify SEC$USERS, if needed. I'm likely to commit changes
> for MON$ tables before Beta 2 as
28.10.2014 18:28, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> I understand that using mon$ tables could be better but afraid for FB3
> time for such changes is gone.
Feel free to modify SEC$USERS, if needed. I'm likely to commit changes
for MON$ tables before Beta 2 as well.
Dmitry
--
28.10.2014 16:28, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> This requires small fix in code processing isc_info_svc_user_dbpath
> (make it depend upon isc_spb_expected_db).
Will it break possibility to get security database patch without connecting
to a
database? I mean that existing applications that manage us
>> No, that's not what it is -- Database Workbench will connect to the
>> database,
>> via the server, providing a username/password combination.
>>
>> But after that, it can provide the user with a list of available user
>> names
>> for
>> the use in the Grant Manager.
>>
>> Firebird 3 always pr
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 12:18:06 Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> I'm not sure how hard to implement is windows solution but I do not see
> too big problems with linux. Specially when linux world will be ready to
> keep the one and only one way to start server - systemd.
Systemd? It seems to me that sys
On 10/28/14 17:58, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 15:50, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>>> That is, is it possible to use a secondary security database for multiple
normal
databases?
>> Yes.
>> It was designed to be so from the beginning of FB3, but there was a bug
>> which actively showed
On 10/28/14 18:00, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
>> It's only .exe, that's why I've never used to work with it.
> Wine is your friend. ;)
I have and use it but I very often need to check fbclient too, therefore
for firebird it's not an option for me. On the other hand I do not need
If possible, I would like to enable a “User Editor” once connect to the
database inside Database Workbench
>>> I suppose it's a kind of client tool, but how can solution be oriented
>>> for specific one?
>> Here's Database Workbench:
>> http://www.upscene.com/database_workbench/
>>
>> Thi
28.10.2014 15:50, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> That is, is it possible to use a secondary security database for multiple
>> >normal
>> >databases?
> Yes.
> It was designed to be so from the beginning of FB3, but there was a bug
> which actively showed itself just after adding users' mapping.
It is p
On 10/28/14 17:08, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
> Hello Alex,
>
>>> When connecting, I get:
>>> Missing security context for E:\TEMP\2014 FB CONFERENCE.FDB
>>>
>>> When I removed the entry “SecurityDatabase”, I’m able to connect again.
>>>
>>> How is this supposed to work?
>> Fixed
>
Roman,
<>
Yes - the build in 3.0 cannot use the -install-name flag, there are a couple of
other issues with the relevant build files in
builds.posix as well, which I haven't committed yet. I will send you working
prefix.darwin_x86_64 and darwin defaults via email
privately.
Regards
Paul
-
Hello Alex,
>> When connecting, I get:
>> Missing security context for E:\TEMP\2014 FB CONFERENCE.FDB
>>
>> When I removed the entry “SecurityDatabase”, I’m able to connect again.
>>
>> How is this supposed to work?
>
>Fixed
Great. I can download the nightly build tomorrow then?
>> 2) Is it poss
Hello!
I'm trying to build current firebird 3 trunk on my macosx 10.10. On 10.9
was the same problems so it's not related to the last update.
I installed icu and tommath libs via brew package manager. They are located
in:
/usr/local/Cellar/icu4c/52.1
/usr/local/Cellar/libtommath/0.42.0
I tried t
On 10/27/14 15:18, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Two questions with regard to using additional security databases:
>
> 1)
>
> I added the following to the databases.conf:
>
> FBConf2014 = e:/temp/2014 FB Conference.fdb
> {
> SecurityDatabase = e:/temp/sec.fdb
> }
>
>
>
The compound key scheme isn't quite right. Binary 0 bytes delimit keys,
binary 0s in a key are replaced with the sequence 1,0 and binary 1s in the
key are replaced with the sequence 1,1. So delimiter < 0 < 1 < everything
else. I wish I had invented it, but I only stole it.
On Monday, October 27
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:43:46PM +0100, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 12:32, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > at the moment one starts multiple server instances, either each with
> > a different value of FIREBIRD variable or with different arguments to -e,
> > -el and -em options.
>
> How? W
28.10.2014 12:32, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> at the moment one starts multiple server instances, either each with
> a different value of FIREBIRD variable or with different arguments to -e,
> -el and -em options.
How? Windoes Service manager doesn't llow to set environment variable for a
servic
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:11:42PM +0100, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 11:35, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> >> I like that idea. I think it is possible, just by setting the
> >> >$FIREBIRD variable for each instance - the server will look there for
> >> >things like fb.conf etc. And there are a
On 10/28/14 13:52, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 28.10.2014 13:28, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> If user knows what he's doing, then the database is not validating, it's
>> just wasting his time.
>>
>> I think there should be a NO VALIDATION option.
> Generally, I don't mind. My point was that *
On 10/28/14 12:37, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 09:08:01AM +0100, Paul Reeves wrote:
>> It also struck me that support for multiple installs in the installer
>> may just never be possible. There is a lot of work involved at
>> different levels. And it is even worse on linux.
I'm
28.10.2014 11:35, Michal Kubecek wrote:
>> I like that idea. I think it is possible, just by setting the
>> >$FIREBIRD variable for each instance - the server will look there for
>> >things like fb.conf etc. And there are also vars for placing the lock
>> >manager and message file. Something else t
28.10.2014 13:28, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>
> If user knows what he's doing, then the database is not validating, it's
> just wasting his time.
>
> I think there should be a NO VALIDATION option.
Generally, I don't mind. My point was that *by default* VALIDATION
should be implied and
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:05:01AM +0100, Paul Reeves wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 October 2014 10:37:21 Michal Kubecek wrote about multiple
> installs under linux:
>
> > Just an idea... how about going in the opposite direction and providing
> > something like Apache (IP based) virtual servers? By all
On 28/10/2014 06:34, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>
> All that said, I see no need for a configuration option. Validation
> should be always the default behavior. Any RDBMS is first of all about
> consistency and only then about performance.
>
>
If user knows what he's doing, then the database is not va
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 10:37:21 Michal Kubecek wrote about multiple
installs under linux:
>
> Multiple installations would be tricky indeed. On the other hand, having
> multiple instances of one installed version is quite easy and we also
> have lightweight virtualization techniques like LXC c
> When we decided not to validate constraints on declaration, our reasoning
> was that computations and database access were expensive and any decent
> application programmer or DBA would always validate constraints before
> declaring them and control access to the constrained items until the
> con
28.10.2014 12:35, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> Oracle?.. Their invalid DB objects aren't about consistency even in the
> smallest.
Invalid metadata <> invalid data. We're speaking about the latter here.
Dmitry
--
Fire
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 09:08:01AM +0100, Paul Reeves wrote:
>
> It also struck me that support for multiple installs in the installer
> may just never be possible. There is a lot of work involved at
> different levels. And it is even worse on linux. There, we are
> planning to move towards distro
28.10.2014 9:34, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> Any RDBMS is first of all about
> consistency and only then about performance.
Oracle?.. Their invalid DB objects aren't about consistency even in the
smallest.
--
WBR, SD.
--
On 10/28/14 11:49, Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions) wrote:
> Anyone?
>
At the first glance there is regression in beta1 unofficial.
Investigating it.
--
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://lists.s
Anyone?
From: Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions)
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 1:18 PM
To: firebird-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [Firebird-devel] Beta 1: how to use additional security databases?
Hi,
Two questions with regard to using additional security databases:
1)
I added the
On Tuesday 28 October 2014 09:42:45 Martijn Tonies (Upscene Productions)
wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> >> It would be nice to be able to easily control the instances from a small
> >> application.
> >
> >What's wrong with the Windows Service Manager? ;-)
>
> I was thinking more of configuration options
Hi Dmitry,
>> It would be nice to be able to easily control the instances from a small
>> application.
>
>What's wrong with the Windows Service Manager? ;-)
I was thinking more of configuration options without having to go through
the config files. ;)
With regards,
Martijn Tonies
---
<>
I am not prepared to even think about it. Trying to get an installer
that can handle 3.0 is proving to be more complicated than it should be.
Regards
Paul
--
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at
https://l
28.10.2014 10:34, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> It would be nice to be able to easily control the instances from a small
> application.
What's wrong with the Windows Service Manager? ;-)
Dmitry
--
Firebird-Devel mailing lis
28.10.2014 00:14, Thomas Steinmaurer wrote:
> Now while constraints are under discussion, if we could put deferred
> constraints into the "nice to have pot" ... ;-)
Not for v4, sorry.
Dmitry
--
Firebird-Devel mailing
Ann,
> I think it would be wise to add a [NO] VALIDATION modifier to constraint
> definitions, including NOT NULL and referential integrity definitions.
> In the presence of a VALIDATION modifier, Firebird would begin enforcing
> the constraint on commit (as now) and then start a pass to insure th
I was thinking about this in the early hours of the morning (as you do), and
it struck me that it is a while since I actually examined the code for the
installer. It doesn't check any ports for firebird and uses various
techniques to search for an active server, as well as looking for known
bi
>>> What is - currently - the reason to keep supporting the cpl applet? Does
>>> it
>>> do anything more than just starting/stopping the service?
>>
>> It has always allowed switching the guardian on and off, as well as
>> switching
>> between running as an app or a service.
>
>My vote would be t
>> When we decided not to validate constraints on declaration, our
>> reasoning was that computations and database access were expensive and
>> any decent application programmer or DBA would always validate
>> constraints before declaring them and control access to the constrained
>> items until th
Agreed
Personally, I think production "servers" shouldn`t be running as an
application in the first place. If anyone needs it - they should know how
to switch.
2014-10-27 23:25 GMT+02:00 Dmitry Yemanov :
> 27.10.2014 19:58, Paul Reeves wrote:
>
> >> What is - currently - the reason to keep suppor
64 matches
Mail list logo
