I'm running Debian 6.0 (squeeze) which has a package for FB 2.5.0. FB
2.5.1, is only available for Debian sid (unstable).
Is there any way to get FB 2.5.1 for a production system using Debian
package management? Or must I install it using the packages from
Firebird?
Disclaimer: This message (inc
I found a restore script that has been in use for a while that is
calling gbak incorrectly. It contains "gbak -se service_mgr" instead of
"gbak -se localhost:service_mgr".
The backup is being restored correctly. Is gbak silently ignoring the
-se flag or is it assuming loca
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Debian install
I have always used the packet taken down from the official place of
firebird without a hitch.
Best Regards
=
|| ISMAEL ||
=
- Original Message -
From: Rick Debay
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday
Thanks.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dmitry Kuzmenko
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 10:06 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Gbak and service manager
Hello, Rick!
Fri
upport@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Philippe Makowski
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 10:43 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Debian install
2011/10/19 Rick Debay
> I'm running Debian 6.0 (squeeze) which has a package for FB 2.5.0. FB
> 2.5.1, is o
doesn't make any sense to only consider
one database.
Thanks, Rick DeBay
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unautho
t: Saturday, January 21, 2012 9:46 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Sizing conversion project
Rick Debay wrote:
> We are using Firebird and I've been tasked with determining the costs
> for migrating to MS SQL Server. The last time I used the lat
gbak: ERROR: I/O error for file "/tmp/fb_sort__M9plMy"
gbak: ERROR: Error while trying to write to file
gbak: ERROR: No space left on device
We've started getting this error when restoring an 11GB database. How
much space should we estimate for temp files?
Disclaimer: This message (incl
pport@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 11:53 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] Sizing conversion project
> You mean "beside licensing cost"?
I was hoping to use a SWAG such as cost p
> Twice the size is an old and possibly still a good guess, I think. It
all depends on the number and size of the indices.
So to restore an 11GB database we should have 22GB available where
TempDirectories points?
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and may be
priv
After every backup, we immediately restore to make sure the backup was
valid.
Is there a way to tee and pipe the backup to a restore process so this
happens in parallel?
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake plea
If a stored procedure has three variables
DECLARE VARIABLE A NUMERIC(18,3);
DECLARE VARIABLE B NUMERIC(18,3);
DECLARE VARIABLE C DOUBLE PRECISION;
And a function is evaluated with these values
A = B / C;
A = 7.3 / 0.839080459770115
Then the value stored in A will be 8.7 not 8.700119 (a
Rick Debay
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 12:08 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Precision in stored procedures
If a stored procedure has three variables
DECLARE VARIABLE A NUMERIC(18,3);
DECLARE VARIABLE B NUMERIC(18,3);
DECLARE VARIABLE C DOUBLE PRECISION;
And
We test restoring all our backups. Last night, this happened. We
compared the DDL of our production system with a week of backups, and
didn't find any changes in column definitions. We are starting another
restore with verbose logging. Any ideas as to what could have happened
or what we should
rt@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 12:08 PM
> To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [firebird-support] Precision in stored procedures
>
> If a stored procedure has three variables
> you forgot -v option. Without it you can't see where error happened
What I posted was what we were greeted with in the logs this morning.
The backup/restore that should complete around 3:30 PM EDT contains the
verbose flag.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mail
s.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:10 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Database restore error
We test restoring all our backups. Last night, this happened. We
compared the DDL of our production s
If B_TABLE.VALUE2 never contains 'X' and half of A_TABLE.VALUE1 are 'Y'
what would be the cost of executing this statement? A_TABLE.VALUE1 is
indexed and B_TABLE.VALUE2 does not have an index.
Would it be half of A_TABLE rows times all of B_TABLE rows? Or would
the Not Exists statement be evalua
PLAN (B_TABLE NATURAL)
PLAN (AT INDEX (IDX_A_TABLE))
Does this mean that for every single row selected from table A, it
touches every single row from table B?
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leyne, Sean
Sent:
> Whether Firebird takes advantage of this fact
That was my hope, but I don't think that's happening.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tomasz Tyrakowski
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 3:31 AM
To: firebird-suppor
This query uses natural for both tables, when I expected it to use an
index for the join.
select *
from table1 t1
join table2 t2 on t2.indexed_char14 starting with t.indexed_char10
where t.unindex_varchar containing 'foo'
This uses an index, so the optimizer knows about it.
select *
from table2
Anyone? Without any indexes, I won't live to see this complete.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2012 5:18 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-su
Damn. Anyone know why the heck FB won't use an index in a join with 'starting
with'?
FWIW, I ran the natural part of the query to generate a bunch of "starting with
'xyx' or" and appended them to query the other table. Luckily I didn't hit any
query limits.
-Original Message-
From: fi
This query returns 'no current record for fetch operation'
SELECT po.ID, pb.ID
FROM
RPL_PO po
JOIN RPL_POBILL pb
ON pb.PO = po.ID
WHERE
po.ID = ? AND
NOT EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM RPL_PO_ITM poi
LEFT JOIN RPL_POBILL_ITM pbi
ON poi.NDC = pbi.NDC AND pbi.INVOICE = pb.ID
In case anyone is confused as to what I'm trying to accomplish, it's an
outer join on line items where both sides match with no NULL items.
If my approach is poor, then I won't have to worry about question about
the exception.
SELECT po.ID, pb.ID
FROM
RPL_PO po
JOIN RPL_POBILL pb
ON pb.PO
I will, after we migrate to FB 2.5.x. Right now we're still on 1.5.6.
And to forestall "why haven't you moved yet" posts, I'd love to but
we're stuck until mgmt lets us.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ann Ha
I tried the queries Sean and Svein suggested, and they didn't throw an
exception. I then ran my original query to compare, and it WORKED.
Is my database haunted? The only thing that could have changed is that
a backup ran overnight which would have collected garbage, and any
transactions that wer
> I think it is likely that your query could be improved. Am I right in
assuming that you want
> there in ALL cases where there is an RPL_PO_ITM to also exist at least
one RPL_POBILL_ITM
> record and that all matching RPL_POBILL_ITM must have COST defined?
No. In all cases for each RPL_PO_ITM.NDC
Is a new transaction started after a commit command in an isql script?
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized u
I have a parent table with multiple child tables.
Each child row has a foreign key that points to one row in the parent.
Each parent row must have a child row pointing to it.
Each parent row can have only child from any of the child tables
pointing to it.
The child is created before the parent.
A
Clever. I'll take a look at it.
> What isn't prevented is addition of parentless children, but you didn't
> mention that.
Sad, but it's allowed.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Svein Erling Tysvær
Sent: S
So each statement in an isql script is a new transaction? Is there any
way to force the whole script to be one transaction?
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Thomas
Steinmaurer
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 2:40 P
I should have paid more attention to your reply, and also googled before
asking: http://www.firebirdsql.org/manual/isql-transactions.html
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Wednesday, May 09
A database restore failed. Does anyone know what these errors mean, and
what we can do to prevent this from happening again?
/* backup */
gbak -GARBAGE_COLLECT -b rxsaccessdb:accessrxs
/usr/backup/firebird/accessrxs.fbk
/* test restore */
gbak -v -se it-test:service_mgr -use_all_space -r
/opt/fi
Thanks for the quick reply. We'll know the results in ninety minutes.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ann Harrison
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 4:49 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [fire
The next backup/restore worked. Crisis averted.
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or
dissemination
Wouldn't gbak complain about unknown parameters?
I'm not able to connect to the database server right now so I can't run
gbak -help, but the manual at firebirdsql.org states:
-G[ARBAGE_COLLECT)inhibit garbage collection
Disclaimer: This message (including attachments) is confidential and ma
A query with a left join to a table with a computed column returned
values in the computed column even though the row didn't exist in the
table. All other non-computed values came back as null, which was to be
expected.
Is this a bug, or correct by SQL specifications?
Disclaimer: This message (in
I'll test in 2.5.1 and file a bug report.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leyne, Sean
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 1:04 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] Left join and compu
---
FAILED
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 11:15 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] Left join and computed columns
I'll test in 2.5.1
Since TEST_TABLE is empty, the results should be NULL.
Changing the query to 'SELECT *' return the one row in RDB$DATABASE, and
the column TEST_TABLE.ID is NULL and the column TEST_TABLE.COMPUTED_COL
is "FAILED".
If TEST_TABLE is empty, how can anything result from a join?
-Original Message---
: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Left join and computed columns
Rick Debay schrieb am 19.06.2012 um 15:58 (-0400):
> Since TEST_TABLE is empty, the results should be NULL.
> Changing the query to 'SELECT *' return the one row in RDB$DATABASE,
:39 PM, Rick Debay wrote:
> Correct. There is no row, but we are getting data in the non-existing
> row.
> So how do I file a bug report on this?
Go to the Firebird main web site
http://www.firebirdsql.org
Select Development.
Look for the Tracker in the upper right corner of the Develop
I have a table with before and after insert triggers. I also have a
stored procedure that loops, inserting rows in to the table. The last
statement in the loop is WHEN ANY to catch and log errors to an external
table and continue looping.
If an insert trigger throws an exception, will the insert
pport@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Helen Borrie
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 12:35 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Transactions & exception trapping
At 04:49 AM 10/08/2012, Rick Debay wrote:
>I have a table with before and after insert triggers. I also hav
ird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] Transactions & exception trapping
At 05:00 AM 11/08/2012, Rick Debay wrote:
>FOR ... BEGIN
> INSERT_PROCEDURE RETURNING VALUE
> UPDATE TABLE WITH VALUE
> WHEN ... BEGIN
>LOG
> END
>END
>
>If the inser
I have a stored procedure that reads from an external file table.
One of the fields is varchar(10) in the stored procedure and char(10) in
the file.
I am selecting from the stored procedure and inserting in to a table
which has a matching varchar(10) COLLATE ISO8859_1 field.
If a field is empty (LT
I exported the original database as DDL and recreated it. It now works.
Scary, as the database validation tools didn't detect any errors.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Monday, Augu
Does anyone have a Luhn algorithm for Firebird? Especially one I can
embed in a check constraint?
Thanks, Rick DeBay
ISC ERROR CODE:335544345
ISC ERROR MESSAGE:
lock conflict on no wait transaction
violation of FOREIGN KEY constraint "FK_RPLPO_REPLGRP" on table
"RPL_PO"
The relationship between parent and child was always valid, so I don't
know why this error was raised. Can this occur if a column in th
Rarely I'll get this error, and it goes away after recreating the
connection.
Neither gbak (backup & restore) nor gfix (validate) report errors.
What should be my next steps?
(290))
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dmitry Yemanov
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:54 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Can't continue after bugcheck
12.09.2012 19:42, Rick Debay
Does anyone know what these errors mean?
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 5:09 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [firebird-support] Re: Can&#
The field f.ID is alphanumeric, it can contain many types of data and
the data type is described by f.ID_QUALIFIER .
The problem is that Firebird is always evaluating "f.ID =" which throws
an exception when f.ID contains non-numeric characters and b.ID_TYPE_*
is numeric.
FROM FOO f
JOIN BAR b ON
(
rsday, October 04, 2012 3:58 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Order of operations - AND boolean
operator
On 03-10-12 22:30, Rick Debay wrote:
> The field f.ID is alphanumeric, it can contain many types of data and
> the data type is described by f.ID_QUALIF
Debay wrote:
>
>
>
> Does anyone have a Luhn algorithm for Firebird? Especially one I can
> embed in a check constraint?
I have one written in Pascal, that you can translate or use as UDF:
https://github.com/ik5/credit-card-library/blob/master/src/units/luhn.pp
>
&g
Anyone?
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 11:30 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] violation of FOREIGN KEY constraint
ISC
is
to close the program and start it again.
Greetings.
Walter.
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Rick Debay
wrote:
> **
>
>
> Anyone?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
ay, May 14, 2012 11:25 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] Unique foreign key for child tables
-- Original Message ---
From: "Rick Debay"
> I have a parent table with multiple child tables.
> Each child row has a foreign key tha
What is the effective difference between these two key elements
orderings?
ALTER TABLE T ADD CONSTRAINT U UNIQUE (PK, HIGH_MAX_DUP)
ALTER TABLE T ADD CONSTRAINT U UNIQUE (HIGH_MAX_DUP, PK)
The first version is how I normally order key elements, from most unique
to least. Since a primary key ind
> I think you want the most specific column first in the index
That was my understanding. But if Sean has been doing it the other way,
then the impact is probably minimal.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mar
> neither of these constraints make any sense (the PK itself assures uniqueness)
See the posts with the title "Unique foreign key for child tables." It's
needed to be the target for a foreign key.
> UPDATEs used to be slow for non-selective indexes
This is what I'm trying to avoid. Does anyone
-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ann Harrison
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 6:27 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [firebird-support] RE: Order of key elements
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Rick Debay
wrote:
> > neither of
I'm modifying a foreign key from one column to two.
I dropped the original foreign key from the child table, populated the
new columns, and then created the new key.
I forgot to populate the new column in the child table, so all the
relationships looked like this:
ChildParent
-
> I'd have to say that for foreign key relationships a null in the referencing
> field is considered to match
How about in the referenced field? BTW, thanks for the quick reply.
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ann Harrison
Sent: Thu
Anyone available for a quick reply? Schools are closing early for
hurricane Sandy and I'd like to resolve this before an involuntary long
weekend babysitting :-(
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick
I have a table T (PBM_CLAIM BIGINT, CLAIM_SRC SMALLINT, ...) with the
unique constraint:
ALTER TABLE RELAY_CLAIM ADD CONSTRAINT U_RELAY_CLAIM_SRC UNIQUE
(PBM_CLAIM,CLAIM_SRC);
If I try to insert a row with (NULL, NULL, ...) when this constraint
exists, I get the error
ISC ERROR CODE:335544334
CREATE EXCEPTION E '';
CREATE TRIGGER T_TEST_BEFORE FOR T ACTIVE BEFORE INSERT POSITION 0 AS
begin
EXCEPTION E 'TEST BEFORE';
End
CREATE TRIGGER T_TEST_AFTER FOR T ACTIVE AFTER INSERT POSITION 0 AS
begin
EXCEPTION E 'TEST AFTER';
End
Inserting into the table T does not throw an exception.
T
Creating a new test table with triggers, the trigger fires.
Adding triggers to existing tables (restored from 1.5.6), nothing fires.
Perhaps I need to backup using the 2.5.2 gbak???
-Original Message-
From: Rick Debay
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:01 PM
To: firebird-support
Never mind, altering triggers work with Flame Robin. The issue must be
with Database Workbench.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:25 PM
To: firebird-support
Sorry, there was an exception handler that was causing the issue. It
was missed because it was improperly indented.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 12:36 PM
To
This is a FB 1.5.6 bug. It does not appear in our testing for the move
to FB 2.5.2.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rick Debay
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 4:22 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886578
The file /etc/init.d/firebird-superclassic was incorrect. We (James
Calfee) reported a bug against the EPEL firebird-superclassic.x86_64
package and Redhat patched it.
I want to select a bunch of items and insert them somewhere else. If
the insert fails because of a duplicate primary key or unique
constraint, I want to abandon that particular item and continue with the
rest.
This code outlines my logic. Is this correct for what I'm trying to
accomplish?
BEGIN
If I insert duplicate rows, I assume the order of operations is:
Before triggers
Insert
Exception
After triggers <-- never executed
Since a block wasn't exited before the exception was handled, wouldn't
any database statements in the block stand?
Assume for a moment that it wasn't a constraint violation, but a table
trigger throwing a custom exception, and the catch block handles it
instead of handling constraint violations.
F
Thanks, I'm trying to follow Arthur Conan Doyle's advice "Once you
eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable,
must be the truth" and turn improbabilities to impossibilities.
Rick DeBay
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.
We are currently running Firebird 1.5 on a physical server running
Linux. Automated server processes have the database password hardcoded.
We are migrating to FB 2.5 on Linux VMs. Since FB only integrates with
Windows Active Directory authentication, does anyone have suggestions on
how to manage
After backup we do a test restore:
gbak -v -se server_name:service_mgr -use_all_space -r backup.fbk
test.fdb
Normally we just delete the file after gbak completes, but I'd like to
be nicer to the database server. Some coworkers have also been saying
they think that Firebird is still using the da
>I wonder that you
>- use -use_all_space for test database. You see real speedup?
It requires less space for the test.
>- delete restored database. Why you keep backup, that needed to be
restored again at some reasons? Instead, better keep database, delete
backup.
The backup is written to tape.
Does anyone have any insight in to this?
Running this statement in isql:
EXECUTE PROCEDURE P_IMPORT;
Yields this error:
Statement failed, SQLCODE = -508
no current record for fetch operation
-violation of PRIMARY or UNIQUE KEY constraint
Yet running the same statement in Database Workb
The isql script drops the procedure (which should fail as it doesn't
exist), creates it, uses it, drops it, then exits.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Thomas
Steinmaurer
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 11:08 AM
f Of hvlad
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 4:23 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Catching exception fails under isql
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Debay" wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any insight in to this?
>
> Running t
ch 10, 2013 4:23 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Catching exception fails under isql
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Debay" wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any insight in to this?
>
> Running this statement in isql:
>
port@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Catching exception fails under isql
--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Debay" wrote:
>
> I think it's a 1.5 bug, as executing the procedure from DBW also fails
"no current record for fetch" is we
Does anyone know what this error from gbak is?
Done with volume #1, "/mnt/usb/firebird/clone.fbk"
Press return to reopen that file, or type a new
name followed by return to open a different file.
We have a database that we want to wipe and replace every week,
regardless of whether it is in use.
Are these the correct steps? I notice that 'gfix -online' throws an
error, probably because the database is online after gbak completes. Is
there a way for the restore to not become online during (
> During restore DB is itself in single-user mode, so, noone can connect until
> restore finishes.
Is this new for 2.x? I know we could connect during a restore under 1.5.
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dmitry Kuzmenko
Sent: Wedne
> Why do you use '-shut single' and not '-shut full'
Under 1.5 you can connect to a database while it is restoring, which breaks the
restore. We were throwing everything we could think of at the problem so it
wouldn't happen. If 2.x doesn't allow connections during restore we shouldn't
have t
Would a backup/restore change the physical layout to match the logical?
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ann Harrison
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 4:54 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [f
I get the error 'validation error for column DISCOUNTED, value
"***null***"At procedure ...'
The column definition is
DISCOUNTED D_BOOLEAN DEFAULT 'N' NOT NULL
So why wouldn't its value be set to N when I insert in to the table? Is
it because I'm explicitly trying to insert NULL for the column?
I have a query that needs to use an index that the optimizer isn't
using. How can I get it to add the index to the query plan?
The current plan is
PLAN SORT (JOIN (AC D INDEX (I_MDDBDRUG_GPI), AC CA C INDEX
(I_PBM_CLAIM_NDC), AC RGM SA INDEX (PK_ACT_CHC_PHARM_SUBACCT), AC RGM C
INDEX (PK_CHC), AC
Thanks to both.
-Original Message-
From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Leyne, Sean
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:56 PM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] RE: Default column value not applied
Rick,
> Have you timed your query with the plans hardcoded to ascertain that it
> really is quicker using your preferred plan, Rick?
No, but I'm familiar with the data set and identified this query as running
slow (on FB 2.5.2) compared to its speed on a (now decommissioned) FB 1.5.6 box.
> query its
The problem appeared when on a small test box the cache was reduced from 8192
8KB pages to 4096 pages in order to reduce memory usage. The query is
extremely fast when run a second time, so I assume a large number of pages have
to be moved from disk to cache for each query.
-Original Messa
Executing
INSERT INTO REASON_CODE(REASON,DESCRIPTION) VALUES (99,'TEST';
Yields the error
Dynamic SQL Error SQL error code = -104 corrupt pool
To set the scene, imagine a large script, one typo, and an error message
that makes you think you just thoroughly corrupted a production
database.
gbak:restoring privilege for user SYSDBA
gbak:restoring SQL role: RDB$ADMIN
gbak: ERROR: attempt to store duplicate value (visible to active
transactions) in unique index "RDB$INDEX_39"
RDB$INDEX_39 relation name is RDB$ROLES.
RDB$ROLES has one row, RDB$ADMIN.
Where do I go from here?
97 matches
Mail list logo
