> In FB4, when adding a timestamp field it creates me timestamp_tz (32752).
> normal?
> Norbert Saint Georges
With 64bits FBserver 4.0.0.1714 on Windows, adding timestamp creates correctly
a timestamp without timezone. With which version do you have this result ?
Evelyne
Firebird-Devel mailin
> Actually, it shouldn't be this way because explicitly states that "`TIME`
> and `TIMESTAMP` are synonymous to theirs respectively `WITHOUT TIME ZONE`
> data types".
> --
> WBR, SD.
So sorry for my error, I will not do that againt (answering based on memory)
... only to find this was stat
> In FB4, when adding a timestamp field it creates me timestamp_tz (32752).
> normal?
Yes, unless you force FB4 to use previous versions default datatypes either
with (DataTypeCompatibility = 3.0 in Firebird.conf) or with set bind of
timestamp with time zone to legacy; (see README.set_bind.md i
> > Am I missing something ?
> Yes. New binding operator described in README.set_bind.md.
> WBR, SD.
Thank you ! It works great with
set bind of timestamp with time zone to legacy;
instead of
set time zone bind legacy; -- As I understood from Release Notes.
This speeds up the upgrade pro
Hi,
When I try to use "set time zone bind legacy" as explained in
http://web.firebirdsql.org/downloads/prerelease/v40beta1/Firebird-4.0.0_Beta1-ReleaseNotes.pdf,
I get an error indicating "bind" is not recognized :
SQL> set time zone bind legacy;
Statement failed, SQLSTATE = 42000
Dynamic SQL E
There are two situations where I do not find this convenient :
1) I have to copy Master table records to the destination database so I can
compare values in all fields to "decide" if they must be merged at first (if I
want to do this using SQL).
2) For many tables, I wish to let the user decide (
I created an ticket in the tracker so others who would find this feature useful
can "vote" for it and discuss this...
http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-4408
Thank you.
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Alex
>
> Sean, certainly it's possible to replace almost any of higher than
> pl
Merge records referenced by FK
--
Key: CORE-4408
URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-4408
Project: Firebird Core
Issue Type: New Feature
Reporter: Evelyne Girard
Priority
> Sean wrote :
> There are existing ways to resolve this:
Of course ... I was just proposing a feature which would be IMO useful for many
users, I never said there were no simple way around as SPs using System tables
(but having to be implemented by every firebird user)...
>
> 1- Rethink your s
I regularly find myself having to merge two (or more) records referenced by
numerous foreign keys... resulting in having to update many tables to perform
this merge. I would find it really useful if there was (and maybe there
already is and I just didn't found it) a way to do this in one update
Project: Firebird Core
Issue Type: Bug
Affects Versions: 3.0 Alpha 1
Environment: Windows 64 bits SuperServer
Reporter: Evelyne Girard
Priority: Minor
With Firebird 3.0 a secondary condition after a between condition is not
accepted (due to
--Message d'origine-
De : Alex Peshkoff
Envoyé : 18 septembre 2013 10:18
> To be precise - need for it is a bug in Alpha1. Client will work with <3
> servers out of the box.
Thank you, this is what I needed to know and it is great news for planning
future deployment !
Evelyne
De : Dimitry Sibiryakov
Envoyé : 18 septembre 2013 10:03
-
18.09.2013 15:56, Evelyne Girard wrote:
> Or maybe this problem is specific to my platform (64 bits Windows used with
> 32 bits applications) ?
Problem is specified to users who don't read R
> Although I can't speak to the development side of things, I learned my
> lesson a long time ago about separating conditions with (parenthesis) just
> for clarity. Have you tried to see if it works like that?
Woody: Yes it is working with parenthesis, the problem is not that I don't know
how t
Hi, Currently the fbclient.dll provided with FB 3.0 is not working with FB 2.5.
This makes it difficult to use Firebird 3.0 for testing purpose (I need to
switch my fbclient.dll files in SysWOW64 everytime I start an application) ...
will it stay that way int the future ? This would complicate
Hi,
With Firebird 3.0 a secondary condition after a between condition is not
accepted (due to new Boolean type presumably) whereas it was in Firebird 2.5
I do not know if it is < as designed > but I did not see any warning about this
in the release notes.
select * from rdb$database where rdb$re
16 matches
Mail list logo
