On 08/08/13 19:27, jack.mason58 wrote:
gbak: ERROR:table/procedure has non-SQL security class defined
From
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=5106F9F2.4040200%40ibphoenix.comforum_name=firebird-devel
At 01:07 a.m. 29/01/2013, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
AFAIR, this is a
It seems as if you are attempting to downgrade a database - at least,
that's what my Google-fu turns up - but I don't have a very high
Google-fu rating! ;-)
There's a tracker on this very matter at
http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-2949.
Cheers,
Norm.
--
Norman Dunbar
Dunbar IT
Amazing!!! Look at the new plan (speed) below!
Due to this the amalgamated report also works in a second or two, thanks a
million S.E.T.
So is it good advise to look for the NATURAL in plan and set indexes of the
related table.field? Or there is more thoughts to it than just this? I still
Amazing!!! Look at the new plan (speed) below!
Due to this the amalgamated report also works in a second or two, thanks a
million S.E.T.
Congratulations, reducing the execution time from 20-25 minutes to a few
seconds sounds very good.
So is it good advise to look for the NATURAL in plan
Thanks a lot SET for the help and the explanation. I will keep a look out for
the plans and look for such NATURALs
Kind regards
Bhavbhuti
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Svein Erling Tysvær
svein.erling.tysvaer@... wrote:
Amazing!!! Look at the new plan (speed) below!
Due to
On 08/08/2013 11:49, Svein Erling Tysvær wrote:
Can you show us the statistics when the database is slow?
Exactly what numbers would you like? - we can re-run and generate
anything that would be helpful.
I'm only wondering if the gap between oldest (interesting/active)
transaction and
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 07:41:27 +0100, Norman Dunbar nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk
wrote:
On 08/08/13 19:27, jack.mason58 wrote:
gbak: ERROR:table/procedure has non-SQL security class defined
From
Thanks for your response, but this doesn't appear to be relevant as we do not
know what ODS is, have never used it, and created the database brand new under
Firebird 2.5.
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Norman Dunbar Norman@... wrote:
On 08/08/13 19:27, jack.mason58 wrote:
gbak:
Thanks for your response. The version of gbak is 2.52 right off the
Firebirdsql.com website yesterday. The database was backed up successfully
using that version of gbak, but would not restore without the indicated error.
gbak has another problem (will not reliably backup one of our
Thanks for your response. We are not downgrading a database; quite the
opposite. Interbase 6.0 is about 10 years old and since we upgraded our server
from Windows 7 to Linux Mint, we wanted to upgrade our database server to one
currently supported, and since the Interbase format is supported
... and since the Interbase format is supported by Firebird
I think I have an idea on why you have problems. From where and
when is the information that Interbase format is supported by
Firebird?
Whether we use the old Interbase 6.02 gbak or the current 2.52 (as of
yesterday) Firebird gbak, gbak will not reliably backup one of our Interbase
databases.
The structure of the failing database table is quite simple: one integer, one
timestamp, and one blob. The blob appears to be the
If you copy gbak.exe 2.5.2 from the installation directory into another
directory, gbak will not execute correctly in the new directory.
For older versions of gbak, we could copy gbak into a working directory so it
was simple to execute a backup or restore command in a Windows cmd window
If you copy gbak.exe 2.5.2 from the installation directory into another
directory, gbak will not execute correctly in the new directory.
For older versions of gbak, we could copy gbak into a working directory so it
was simple to execute a backup or restore command in a Windows cmd window
Firebird was developed to be a better Interbase and has improved on Interbase
over the years. We have applications that run identically and equally well
whether connected to an Interbase server or a Firebird server. In none of the
cases is it Firebird to Firebird.
It is gbak that has the
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 15:10:31 -, jack.mason58
jack.maso...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Where do I find fbstat? It is not included in the 2.5.2 download I
pulled
yesterday from firebirdsql.com. It is not in the bin directory nor the
top
directory.
03/19/2013 11:23 AM 241,664 gstat.exe
Hi !
Em 9/8/2013 12:10, jack.mason58 escreveu:
Where do I find fbstat? It is not included in the 2.5.2 download I pulled
yesterday from firebirdsql.com. It is not in the bin directory nor the top
directory.
It's GSTAT
It's a long long time that I used Interbase...
But I think you
I think I've had this before, a long time ago. If I remember right, I ended
up using the -L switch to ignore transactions in limbo.
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jack.mason58
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 6:43 AM
To:
liviusliv...@poczta.onet.pl [2013-08-08 22:24] :
Hi,
I know how to do select with this, but i ask how should row_number work
without specify order by in over clause. It numerate records in some internal
order or it should numerate it in retrival order.
You do select an without order you
Karol Bieniaszewski wrote
If this is really big update count and pages of that table are filled near
100% then row version go to another page and to process one row engine must
read all pages as many times as versions pages
But may be i'am wrong - i do not know super internal details
On Aug 9, 2013, at 9:20 AM, Tim Ward t...@telensa.com wrote:
The gap between OIT and next transaction was around 2,000,000. I did a
manual sweep and the gap changed to zero, but the performance of the
query did not change. (I'd said in an earlier message that I'd been told
that running a
During development, we generate a number of empty databases with the same file
name, each to replace the previous version.
Question: Is it required, or desirable, manually to delete an existing, empty
FB table prior to generating a new one with the same file name and location
(path)?
Best,
22 matches
Mail list logo
