[Firebird-net-provider] how to get started...

2009-05-11 Thread Sam Carleton
My interested in developing on the Firebird .Net Provider is to figure out why the dialog simply goes away after entering a value in it. I have downloaded the trunk and it is compiling just fine. The million dollar question is: how do I installed the compiled version such that I can debug the co

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] fbTransactionoptions

2009-05-11 Thread Ivan Arabadzhiev
Mon, 11 May 2009 17:46:31 +0300, Jiri Cincura : > 2009/5/11 Ivan Arabadzhiev : >> well ... pretty much anything I could think of. From what I googled - I >> need a (Shared | LockRead | NoWait | RecordVersion) transaction. I have >> tried several variations (consistency, concurency, readcommited ..

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] fbTransactionoptions

2009-05-11 Thread Jiri Cincura
2009/5/11 Ivan Arabadzhiev : > well ... pretty much anything I could think of. From what I googled - I > need a (Shared | LockRead | NoWait | RecordVersion) transaction. I have > tried several variations (consistency, concurency, readcommited ...). It > is intended to read through a table of ID`s t

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] fbTransactionoptions

2009-05-11 Thread Ivan Arabadzhiev
Mon, 11 May 2009 14:24:16 +0300, Jiri Cincura : > 2009/5/11 Ivan Arabadzhiev : >>  public FbTransaction BeginTransaction(FbTransactionOptions options, >> string transactionName) >> >> overload of the function, but according to google fb 2.1 checks the >> header >> in a different way than fb 2.0.

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] fbTransactionoptions

2009-05-11 Thread Ivan Arabadzhiev
Fri, 08 May 2009 19:03:12 +0300, Jiri Cincura : > 2009/5/8 Ivan Arabadzhiev : >> Yes, I do mean those, but for example "LockRead | Shared" throws an >> exception upon connect. If I use only "ReadCommited" it`s ok. Could you > > Use IsolationLevel.ReadCommited and that's OK. > >> paste a link to so

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] fbTransactionoptions

2009-05-11 Thread Jiri Cincura
2009/5/11 Ivan Arabadzhiev : >  public FbTransaction BeginTransaction(FbTransactionOptions options, > string transactionName) > > overload of the function, but according to google fb 2.1 checks the header > in a different way than fb 2.0. Is anyone else using this method (or am I > a lot dummer tha