firebird-net-provider — All about development of the MS .Net provider

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Migrations

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

Hi,

I just brought the branch up to date. Please hold your PRs for a week or
so. I'll clean it up and do some final changes. Then we'll finish it,
merge it and it'll go out (likely even before EF 6.2.0).

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Error compiling 4_8 Version

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

Here's the 4.8.0.0 tag building just fine
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/cincura_net/firebirdsql-data-firebirdclient/build/0.0.0.452
. Without an error your have it's anybody's guess.

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015, at 13:44, Nicolas F. Timmers wrote:
> Hello,
> 
>  
> 
> I'm getting na error when compiling the new version of .net provider 4_8
> on
> the file "FbTransactionOption.cs"
> 
>  
> 
> I Downloaded him from
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/firebird/files/firebird-net-provider/4.8.0/
> 
>  
> 
> Any help ?
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

[Firebird-net-provider] Error compiling 4_8 Version

[Nicolas F. T. <nft...@ho...>]

Hello,

 

I'm getting na error when compiling the new version of .net provider 4_8 on
the file "FbTransactionOption.cs"

 

I Downloaded him from
http://sourceforge.net/projects/firebird/files/firebird-net-provider/4.8.0/

 

Any help ?

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

> I don't think there is even an issue here
After taking another view at what happens, I don't think either.

The exception is thrown when similar updates are made for one field,
from several threads, when NO_WAIT specified. Only this flag causes it
to throw. No matter if you specify flags consistent or concurrency. As
I understood this is expected behavior.

NO_WAIT flag is set for any IsolationLevel specified for a
FbTransaction. The behavior of such updates is different from MSSQL
provider (it waits) and discovering this was a kind frustrating and
resulted in this thread.


On 20 September 2015 at 16:30, Alexander Muylaert-Gelein
<amu...@ho...> wrote:
> I don't think there is even an issue here.  inside two different
> transactions, you simply cannot update the same record.  Who would win in
> the end and what would be the end result.  I'm pretty sure if you can solve
> this, the firebird team would gladly implement this.
>
> a
>
>
>> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:12:25 +0300
>> From: zab...@gm...
>> To: fir...@li...
>
>> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
>>
>> I don't think that the issue in the .NET provider. It just forwards
>> options to fbembed.dll for transactions it just TPB. And do it right.
>> The problem is in the engine, I've retested it with C API and the
>> behavior is similar to observed. My case is similar to the described
>> here: http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq109/. With just one difference:
>> values field updated to is not depends on each other. I just update
>> the same field from several threads. I've crutched this with skipping
>> the exception because consistency is not a concern for this field. But
>> IMO, there is an issue in the engine.
>>
>> On 20 September 2015 at 14:03, LtColRDSChauhan <rds...@gm...> wrote:
>> >> Message: 3
>> >> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:56:20 +0200
>> >> From: Ji?? ?in?ura <ji...@ci...>
>> >> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
>> >> To: "For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers"
>> >> <fir...@li...>
>> >> Message-ID:
>> >> <144...@we...>
>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, ???????? ?????? wrote:
>> >> > Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
>> >> > record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.
>> >>
>> >> The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET;
>> >> anywhere, anytool). :D
>> >>
>> > Transactions issues in .NET Provider need to be addressed.
>> > Multithread/parallel programming and transactions enable correct
>> > exploitation of multicore machines. I understand Firebird 3.0 takes
>> > major
>> > advances in this area.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Firebird-net-provider mailing list
>> > Fir...@li...
>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>> >
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
>> Fir...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Alexander Muylaert-G. <amu...@ho...>]

I don't think there is even an issue here.  inside two different transactions, you simply cannot update the same record.  Who would win in the end and what would be the end result.  I'm pretty sure if you can solve this, the firebird team would gladly implement this.
a

> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:12:25 +0300
> From: zab...@gm...
> To: fir...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
> 
> I don't think that the issue in the .NET provider. It just forwards
> options to fbembed.dll for transactions it just TPB. And do it right.
> The problem is in the engine, I've retested it with C API and the
> behavior is similar to observed. My case is similar to the described
> here: http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq109/. With just one difference:
> values field updated to is not depends on each other. I just update
> the same field from several threads. I've crutched this with skipping
> the exception because consistency is not a concern for this field. But
> IMO, there is an issue in the engine.
> 
> On 20 September 2015 at 14:03, LtColRDSChauhan <rds...@gm...> wrote:
> >> Message: 3
> >> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:56:20 +0200
> >> From: Ji?? ?in?ura <ji...@ci...>
> >> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
> >> To: "For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers"
> >>         <fir...@li...>
> >> Message-ID:
> >>         <144...@we...>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, ???????? ?????? wrote:
> >> > Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
> >> > record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.
> >>
> >> The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET;
> >> anywhere, anytool). :D
> >>
> > Transactions issues in .NET Provider  need to be addressed.
> > Multithread/parallel programming and transactions enable correct
> > exploitation of multicore machines.  I understand Firebird 3.0 takes major
> > advances in this area.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> > Fir...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
> >
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
 		 	   		  

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

I don't think that the issue in the .NET provider. It just forwards
options to fbembed.dll for transactions it just TPB. And do it right.
The problem is in the engine, I've retested it with C API and the
behavior is similar to observed. My case is similar to the described
here: http://www.firebirdfaq.org/faq109/. With just one difference:
values field updated to is not depends on each other. I just update
the same field from several threads. I've crutched this with skipping
the exception because consistency is not a concern for this field. But
IMO, there is an issue in the engine.

On 20 September 2015 at 14:03, LtColRDSChauhan <rds...@gm...> wrote:
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:56:20 +0200
>> From: Ji?? ?in?ura <ji...@ci...>
>> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
>> To: "For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers"
>>         <fir...@li...>
>> Message-ID:
>>         <144...@we...>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, ???????? ?????? wrote:
>> > Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
>> > record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.
>>
>> The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET;
>> anywhere, anytool). :D
>>
> Transactions issues in .NET Provider  need to be addressed.
> Multithread/parallel programming and transactions enable correct
> exploitation of multicore machines.  I understand Firebird 3.0 takes major
> advances in this area.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[LtColRDSChauhan <rds...@gm...>]

>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 19:56:20 +0200
> From: Ji?? ?in?ura <ji...@ci...>
> Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert
> To: "For users and developers of the Firebird .NET providers"
>         <fir...@li...>
> Message-ID:
>         <144...@we...>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, ???????? ?????? wrote:
> > Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
> > record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.
>
> The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET;
> anywhere, anytool). :D
>
> Transactions issues in .NET Provider  need to be addressed.
Multithread/parallel programming and transactions enable correct
exploitation of multicore machines.  I understand Firebird 3.0 takes major
advances in this area.

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Version 4.8

[Mark R. <ma...@la...>]

On 19-9-2015 07:00, Jiří Činčura wrote:
> I have no idea. The website changes are done by another person, not me.
>

The site has been updated.

Mark
-- 
Mark Rotteveel

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Version 4.8

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

I have no idea. The website changes are done by another person, not me. 

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015, at 22:25, Nicolas F. Timmers wrote:
> When version 4.8 will be available in the link
> http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/additional-downloads/
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

[Firebird-net-provider] Version 4.8

[Nicolas F. T. <nft...@ho...>]

When version 4.8 will be available in the link
http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/additional-downloads/

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Two streams

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

I also tried to have the buffer bigger, because there's never enough
performance. The tests are not mind-blowingly faster, but also not
slower. And in _general_ bigger buffer (4k -> 32k in this case
(https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/commit/ca24546ba96b55cf2122e8be6984bde1dd40a8d6))
means bigger bang.

If anybody wants to give it a try, the build is here
https://ci.appveyor.com/project/cincura_net/firebirdsql-data-firebirdclient/build/0.0.0.458
.

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 17:57, Геннадий Забула wrote:
> Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
> record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.

The advice is simple. Don't update same record (not only in .NET;
anywhere, anytool). :D

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Two streams

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

Async is not a problem either. There's still one pipe to server to work
with. 

I did some preliminary testing and so far it works. Let's see where it
ends. 

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

On Thu, Sep 17, 2015, at 16:13, Геннадий Забула wrote:
> I've also looked at these streams but had left them alone.
> Network stream works well with both Read and Write. But still not sure
> about multithreaded Read/Write. BufferedStream internally uses one
> buffer for both.
> From
> https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/src/mscorlib/src/System/IO/BufferedStream.cs
> /// Class Invariants:
> /// The class has one buffer, shared for reading & writing.
> /// It can only be used for one or the other at any point in time - not
> both.
> Again, for current implementation using two streams is redundant, but
> if async involved I can't tell anything.
> 
> On 17 September 2015 at 16:51, Jiří Činčura <ji...@ci...> wrote:
> > HI *,
> >
> > I'm looking at
> > https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L136
> > and wondering why there's two streams? The underlying network stream
> > (https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L204)
> > is just one.
> >
> > There's no interleaving so why to have two. And also you can't have
> > interleaving because you might have dangling buffer data (or rigorously
> > flush, and that's back to no interleaving case).
> >
> > Or am I missing something?
> >
> > --
> > Mgr. Jiří Činčura
> > Independent IT Specialist
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> > Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> > in one place.
> > SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> > _______________________________________________
> > Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> > Fir...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

Narrowed the problem. The cause is a multithreaded update of the same
record field. Transactions, as I said don't dispatch the issue.

On 17 September 2015 at 17:38, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
> lock conflict on no wait transaction
> Acquire lock for relation (<Table with simultenous updates>) failed
> ---> FirebirdSql.Data.Common.IscException: lock conflict on no wait
> transaction
> Acquire lock for relation (<Table with simultenous updates>) failed
>
> On 17 September 2015 at 17:38, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
>> I was wrong about IsolationLevel. If use Isolationlevel.Serializable
>> exception message changes to:
>>
>> On 17 September 2015 at 17:32, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
>>> I'm trying to insert to database multiple items at once via following code:
>>>
>>> using (var transaction =
>>> act.Database.BeginTransaction(System.Data.IsolationLevel.RepeatableRead))
>>> {
>>>   // inserting and updating several related entities.
>>>   act.SaveChanges() // Throws exception
>>> }
>>>
>>> Exception message:
>>> lock conflict on no wait transaction
>>> deadlock
>>> update conflicts with concurrent update
>>> concurrent transaction number is 665378
>>>
>>> A problematic query that throws is about updating the entity, that all
>>> my queries update.
>>>
>>> Using any other IsolationLevel doesn't affect the behavior.

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

lock conflict on no wait transaction
Acquire lock for relation (<Table with simultenous updates>) failed
---> FirebirdSql.Data.Common.IscException: lock conflict on no wait
transaction
Acquire lock for relation (<Table with simultenous updates>) failed

On 17 September 2015 at 17:38, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
> I was wrong about IsolationLevel. If use Isolationlevel.Serializable
> exception message changes to:
>
> On 17 September 2015 at 17:32, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
>> I'm trying to insert to database multiple items at once via following code:
>>
>> using (var transaction =
>> act.Database.BeginTransaction(System.Data.IsolationLevel.RepeatableRead))
>> {
>>   // inserting and updating several related entities.
>>   act.SaveChanges() // Throws exception
>> }
>>
>> Exception message:
>> lock conflict on no wait transaction
>> deadlock
>> update conflicts with concurrent update
>> concurrent transaction number is 665378
>>
>> A problematic query that throws is about updating the entity, that all
>> my queries update.
>>
>> Using any other IsolationLevel doesn't affect the behavior.

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

I was wrong about IsolationLevel. If use Isolationlevel.Serializable
exception message changes to:

On 17 September 2015 at 17:32, Геннадий Забула <zab...@gm...> wrote:
> I'm trying to insert to database multiple items at once via following code:
>
> using (var transaction =
> act.Database.BeginTransaction(System.Data.IsolationLevel.RepeatableRead))
> {
>   // inserting and updating several related entities.
>   act.SaveChanges() // Throws exception
> }
>
> Exception message:
> lock conflict on no wait transaction
> deadlock
> update conflicts with concurrent update
> concurrent transaction number is 665378
>
> A problematic query that throws is about updating the entity, that all
> my queries update.
>
> Using any other IsolationLevel doesn't affect the behavior.

[Firebird-net-provider] Multithread insert

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

I'm trying to insert to database multiple items at once via following code:

using (var transaction =
act.Database.BeginTransaction(System.Data.IsolationLevel.RepeatableRead))
{
  // inserting and updating several related entities.
  act.SaveChanges() // Throws exception
}

Exception message:
lock conflict on no wait transaction
deadlock
update conflicts with concurrent update
concurrent transaction number is 665378

A problematic query that throws is about updating the entity, that all
my queries update.

Using any other IsolationLevel doesn't affect the behavior.

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Two streams

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

I've also looked at these streams but had left them alone.
Network stream works well with both Read and Write. But still not sure
about multithreaded Read/Write. BufferedStream internally uses one
buffer for both.
>From https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/src/mscorlib/src/System/IO/BufferedStream.cs
/// Class Invariants:
/// The class has one buffer, shared for reading & writing.
/// It can only be used for one or the other at any point in time - not both.
Again, for current implementation using two streams is redundant, but
if async involved I can't tell anything.

On 17 September 2015 at 16:51, Jiří Činčura <ji...@ci...> wrote:
> HI *,
>
> I'm looking at
> https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L136
> and wondering why there's two streams? The underlying network stream
> (https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L204)
> is just one.
>
> There's no interleaving so why to have two. And also you can't have
> interleaving because you might have dangling buffer data (or rigorously
> flush, and that's back to no interleaving case).
>
> Or am I missing something?
>
> --
> Mgr. Jiří Činčura
> Independent IT Specialist
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

[Firebird-net-provider] Two streams

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

HI *,

I'm looking at
https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L136
and wondering why there's two streams? The underlying network stream
(https://github.com/cincuranet/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/blob/master/NETProvider/src/FirebirdSql.Data.FirebirdClient/Client/Managed/Version10/GdsConnection.cs#L204)
is just one.

There's no interleaving so why to have two. And also you can't have
interleaving because you might have dangling buffer data (or rigorously
flush, and that's back to no interleaving case).

Or am I missing something?

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

[Firebird-net-provider] [FB-Tracker] Created: (DNET-632) Console application doesn't terminate when FB connection was used

[Mark J. (JIRA) <tr...@fi...>]

Console application doesn't terminate when FB connection was used
-----------------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: DNET-632
                 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/DNET-632
             Project: .NET Data provider
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: ADO.NET Provider
    Affects Versions: 4.8.0.0
         Environment: Windows 10, .NET 4.5, compiled with VS 2015
            Reporter: Mark Junker
            Assignee: Jiri Cincura
         Attachments: TestClosingConnection.zip

A once open FB connection keeps a console application from closing. It seems that the culprit is the pooling implementation. When I turn off pooling, the application closes as expected.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] How to execute NUnit with Mono ?

[Hajime N. <nak...@gm...>]

2015-09-14 20:25 GMT+09:00 Jiří Činčura <ji...@ci...>:

>
> BTW you can also run the NUnit GUI and select the test(s) you want to
> execute. I find it easier when doing interactive debugging.
>
> Thanks

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] [FB-Tracker] Created: (DNET-631) Support for BOOLEAN in FB3

[Jiří Č. <ji...@ci...>]

On Mon, Sep 14, 2015, at 17:17, Геннадий Забула wrote:
> How should this be implemented?

My guess is by typing the code. ;)

> I could take a look at this in the week.

Sure, why not. The BOOLEAN in provider will not take much effort - I was
checking it last year, quickly.

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] [FB-Tracker] Created: (DNET-631) Support for BOOLEAN in FB3

[Mark R. <ma...@la...>]

I have added a link to the initial implementation I did in Jaybird. It 
won't directly map to the C# implementation, but it might give you some 
indication of what needs to change where, and how it is encoded in the 
wire protocol.

Mark

On 14-9-2015 17:17, Геннадий Забула wrote:
> How should this be implemented?
> I could take a look at this in the week.
>
> On 14 September 2015 at 17:06, Jiri Cincura (JIRA)
> <tr...@fi...> wrote:
>> Support for BOOLEAN in FB3
>> --------------------------
>>
>>                   Key: DNET-631
>>                   URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/DNET-631
>>               Project: .NET Data provider
>>            Issue Type: Sub-task
>>            Components: ADO.NET Provider, DDEX Provider, Entity Framework support
>>      Affects Versions: 4.8.0.0
>>              Reporter: Jiri Cincura
>>              Assignee: Jiri Cincura
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> -
>> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
>> -
>> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
>> Fir...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>


-- 
Mark Rotteveel

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] [FB-Tracker] Created: (DNET-631) Support for BOOLEAN in FB3

[Геннадий З. <zab...@gm...>]

How should this be implemented?
I could take a look at this in the week.

On 14 September 2015 at 17:06, Jiri Cincura (JIRA)
<tr...@fi...> wrote:
> Support for BOOLEAN in FB3
> --------------------------
>
>                  Key: DNET-631
>                  URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/DNET-631
>              Project: .NET Data provider
>           Issue Type: Sub-task
>           Components: ADO.NET Provider, DDEX Provider, Entity Framework support
>     Affects Versions: 4.8.0.0
>             Reporter: Jiri Cincura
>             Assignee: Jiri Cincura
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

[Firebird-net-provider] [FB-Tracker] Created: (DNET-631) Support for BOOLEAN in FB3

[Jiri C. (JIRA) <tr...@fi...>]

Support for BOOLEAN in FB3
--------------------------

                 Key: DNET-631
                 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/DNET-631
             Project: .NET Data provider
          Issue Type: Sub-task
          Components: ADO.NET Provider, DDEX Provider, Entity Framework support
    Affects Versions: 4.8.0.0
            Reporter: Jiri Cincura
            Assignee: Jiri Cincura




-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira