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

[Firebird-net-provider] bug report: UNICODE_FSS + CHAR causes exception

[Anders Eggers-K. <di...@ae...>]

I have a CHAR(32) field in my database using UNICODE_FSS as charset
trying to insert a string of 32 chars using=20
INSERT MyTable (ColumnName) VALUES (?)
causes an exception in GdsInetWriter.WriteOpaque
in the line Write(fill, 0, len - buffer.Length);

the value of len is 32 (presumably the size of the CHAR(32) field)
buffer.Length is 96 (why it is not 64 I don't know... thought unicode=20
was 2 bytes per char)

The resulting exception is:

System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Non-negative number required.
Parameter name: count
   at System.IO.MemoryStream.Write(Byte[] buffer, Int32 offset, Int32 =
count)
   at System.IO.BinaryWriter.Write(Byte[] buffer, Int32 index, Int32 =
count)
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.Gds.GdsInetWriter.WriteOpaque(Byte[] =
buffer, Int32 len)
   at =
FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.Gds.GdsInetWriter.WriteParameter(GdsField =
param)
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.Gds.GdsStatement.execute(Boolean isSP)=20
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.Gds.GdsStatement.execute(Boolean isSP)=20
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.Gds.GdsStatement.Execute()=20
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.FbCommand.InternalExecute()=20
   at FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.FbCommand.ExecuteNonQuery() 

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Implicit transactions in FB...

[Zarko G. <del...@ab...>]

Carlos, thanks.

BTW, when do I need (must) to use explicit transactions?


.............................................
Zarko Gajic, webmaster to
aspxDelphi.net - bringing the world of
ASP.NET to Delphi developers
http://www.aspxdelphi.net
email: web...@as...
.............................................

"Carlos Guzmán Álvarez" <car...@te...> wrote in message
news:409...@te......
> Hello:
>
> >Could someone shed some light on implicit transactions (when using
FBCommand
> >for example)...
> >
>
> It's simply that a transaction is not needed for execute commands (unless
> there are a explicit transaction started using
> FbConnection.BeginTransaction):
>
> FbConnection connection = new FbConnection(connectionString);
> connection.Open();
>
> string sql = "SELECT * FROM EMPLOYEE";
>
> /* note that there are no transaction asseigned to the command object */
> FbCommand command = new FbCommand(sql, connection);
> FbDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader();
>
> while (reader.Read())
> {
>     ....
> }
>
> reader.Close();
>
> command.Dispose();
>
> connection.Close();
>
>
> The samples uses ExecuteReader but the same can be made with
> ExecuteNonQuery and ExecuteScalar (or with commands used with
> the DataAdapter).
>
> The implicit transaction support will work better in version 1.6.
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards
>
> Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
> Vigo-Spain
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
> Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
> Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Implicit transactions in FB...

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>Could someone shed some light on implicit transactions (when using FBCommand
>for example)...
>

It's simply that a transaction is not needed for execute commands (unless
there are a explicit transaction started using 
FbConnection.BeginTransaction):

FbConnection connection = new FbConnection(connectionString);
connection.Open();

string sql = "SELECT * FROM EMPLOYEE";

/* note that there are no transaction asseigned to the command object */
FbCommand command = new FbCommand(sql, connection);
FbDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader();

while (reader.Read())
{
    ....
}

reader.Close();

command.Dispose();

connection.Close();


The samples uses ExecuteReader but the same can be made with
ExecuteNonQuery and ExecuteScalar (or with commands used with
the DataAdapter).

The implicit transaction support will work better in version 1.6.



--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

[Firebird-net-provider] server 2003

[Dror C. <dr...@be...>]

Hi
I need to know if firebird work on server 2003 (sbs) with XP-Pro client ?

thanks
Dror

[Firebird-net-provider] Implicit transactions in FB...

[Zarko G. <del...@ab...>]

Hi, all

Could someone shed some light on implicit transactions (when using FBCommand
for example)...

p.s.
Last time I've been using the .net provider there were no implicit
transaction...

__________
Zarko Gajic

RE: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

[Peter J. <pj...@wa...>]

Hi Chris, All,

> in a stored procedure.  I was wonder is there was a way to set up alias in
> Firebird such that they can be used in a store proc in the following
> manner...
> 
> create procedure my_spoc( myparamGuid Guid )
> 
> Where Guid is defined as "CHAR(16) CHARACTER SET OCTETS"

In my limited understanding, this is not supported, as domains are not 
types. FB lacks user definable types and domains are only a very basic
substitute for UDTs.

But to get a more substantive and authorative answer, you may want to 
put your question to the main support mailing list, as it is not .NET 
provider specific.

Regards,
Peter Jacobi

RE: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

[Chris W. <ch...@co...>]

Peter and anyone else,

  I have a general Firebird question,

    I've used the domain keyword to define a name called
"uniqueidentifier" as CHAR(16) character set octet.  Since I have all my
table column defined using "uniqueidentifer" is was easy to change all
my table as I have this defined in once place.

    However I find that isql will not accept "uniqueidentifer" when used

in a stored procedure.  I was wonder is there was a way to set up alias
in Firebird such that they can be used in a store proc in the following
manner...

create procedure my_spoc( myparamGuid Guid )

Where Guid is defined as "CHAR(16) CHARACTER SET OCTETS"

Thanks,
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: fir...@li...
[mailto:fir...@li...] On Behalf Of
Peter Jacobi
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:39 AM
To: ch...@co...
Cc: fir...@li...
Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

Hi Chris,

> I've tried storing this with Firebird and it seems to work.  

Did your test include cases where the GUID did contain
bytes of value zero? On average 1/16th of all GUID of
should have this "feature"?

> Firebird seem
> to treat CHAR types as merely as an array of bytes and doesn't seem to
> attempt any other interpretations.  

Only CHARACTER SET OCTETS is designed to be a mere array of bytes,
so that I'm curious whether your test worked without specifying the
character set.

> With that knowledge and if you are
> developing a new database project make it a guideline that only GUID
> entities are defined as CHAR(16).

CHAR(16) CHARACTER SET OCTETS

> The only issue is reading from Firebird into the .NET provider as it
will
> "think" a GUID is a Firebird TEXT type.  The way for the provider to
> distinguish that the data coming across is a guid is for the provider
to
> check the size.  If the data is TEXT by and size is 16 then assume a
GUID
> and convert the byte stream to a GUID -- wal-la!

I don't know whether the provider already includes special casing
for character set octets, perhaps Carlos should comment on this.

Also short of adding a new type, a new (pseudo) character set can
be created, which behaves mostly like OCTETS but uniquely identifies
the field as being an GUID. It's even possible to make the
stringification
of the GUID a character set conversion to ASCII, if this buys anything.

Regards,
Peter Jacobi



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.

Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
_______________________________________________
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Fir...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

RE: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

[Chris W. <ch...@co...>]

Hi Peter,


>Only CHARACTER SET OCTETS is designed to be a mere array of bytes,
>so that I'm curious whether your test worked without specifying the
>character set.

[1] You are very much correct to point out and bring up the impact that
Firebird character set has on altering CHAR(N) definitions.  Currently
I am using the default character set for Firebird (in other words I did
not set the character set and therefore presuming ascii) that by default
treats CHAR(N) as a stream of 16 bytes. 

Since I just noticed your email I will go back and redefine my columns
to 

CHAR(16) CHARACTER SET OCTETS

I'm confident it will work and I'll let you know the results.

In addition I also tested using Guid.Empty and it works flawlessly.  I
use
Guid.Empty to indicate to Firebird to insert the record.  A valid Guid
is used to indicate update.   Also I use a UDF to generate a new Guid
during inserts.

Thanks for your observation and input.
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Jacobi [mailto:pj...@wa...] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:39 AM
To: ch...@co...
Cc: fir...@li...
Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

Hi Chris,

> I've tried storing this with Firebird and it seems to work.  

Did your test include cases where the GUID did contain
bytes of value zero? On average 1/16th of all GUID of
should have this "feature"?

> Firebird seem
> to treat CHAR types as merely as an array of bytes and doesn't seem to
> attempt any other interpretations.  

Only CHARACTER SET OCTETS is designed to be a mere array of bytes,
so that I'm curious whether your test worked without specifying the
character set.

> With that knowledge and if you are
> developing a new database project make it a guideline that only GUID
> entities are defined as CHAR(16).

CHAR(16) CHARACTER SET OCTETS

> The only issue is reading from Firebird into the .NET provider as it
will
> "think" a GUID is a Firebird TEXT type.  The way for the provider to
> distinguish that the data coming across is a guid is for the provider
to
> check the size.  If the data is TEXT by and size is 16 then assume a
GUID
> and convert the byte stream to a GUID -- wal-la!

I don't know whether the provider already includes special casing
for character set octets, perhaps Carlos should comment on this.

Also short of adding a new type, a new (pseudo) character set can
be created, which behaves mostly like OCTETS but uniquely identifies
the field as being an GUID. It's even possible to make the
stringification
of the GUID a character set conversion to ASCII, if this buys anything.

Regards,
Peter Jacobi

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Developement status report

[Greg P. <ma...@cw...>]

You asked: "how much people here is using Delphi .NET with
Firebird ??"

I'm one.

-- Greg Peterson

[Firebird-net-provider] Developement status report

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:


I will try to release 1.6 Beta 3 by the middle of the next week,
the changes will be mostly internal and some bug fixes.

I will try to this next week to finish the implementation of
some classes of the Borland Data Provider implementation,
just curious :D , how much people here is using Delphi .NET with
Firebird ??







--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] .NET Firebird 1.5

[Dejan G. <not...@no...>]

>
> I installed and it is in my ToolBox, but when I drop to WebForm1 I
> receive the error:
>
Go to Project menu and pick Add Reference. Then on .NET tab click Browse and point to
FirebirdSql.Data.Firebird.dll. That's it.

Remove what you have in your Toolbox, it's doesn't belong there.. and get some nice book about ADO.NET.

Regards,
Dejan

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Error in 1.6 Beta 1

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>The error message is: "Object reference not set to an instance of an
>object".
>
>If I write in connection string "Pooling=false", all work correct.
>
>I test this code on FB 1.5 CS and SS, on local computer and in LAN - the
>exception is rased.
>
>Can you send me you example on C#?
>

Have you tested it with Beta 2 ??





--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

[Firebird-net-provider] Error in 1.6 Beta 1

[work <she...@fo...>]

Hello!

When I set on pooling, I can't close connection.

For example (it's real code):

private string sСonnectionString =
"User=sysdba;"+
"Password=masterkey;" +
"Database=testbase;"    +
"DataSource=localhost;" +
"Port=3050;" +
"Dialect=3;" +
"Charset=WIN1251;" +
"Connection lifetime=15;" +
"Pooling=true;" +                               // !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Packet Size=8192";

public short MayWork(string sUniqKey)
{
       short stResult=0;
       FbConnection Connect=new FbConnection(sСonnectionString);
       try
       {
           Connect.Open();
           try
           {
               FbTransaction Transact=Connect.BeginTransaction(FbTransactionOptions.Read|FbTransactionOptions.NoWait|FbTransactionOptions.ReadCommitted|FbTransactionOptions.RecVersion);
               try
               {
                   FbCommand Command=new FbCommand();
                   Command.Connection=Connect;
                   Command.Transaction=Transact;

                   Command.CommandType=CommandType.StoredProcedure;
                   Command.CommandText="MayWorkForos4User";
                   Command.Parameters.Add("@CUNIQKEY",FbDbType.Char,32).Value=sUniqKey;
                   Command.Parameters.Add("@IRESULT",FbDbType.SmallInt);
                   Command.Parameters[1].Direction=ParameterDirection.ReturnValue;
                   Command.ExecuteNonQuery();

                   stResult=Convert.ToInt16(Command.Parameters[1].Value);
                   Transact.Commit();
                   Command.Dispose();
               }
               catch(Exception ex)
               {
                   stResult=2;
                   Transact.Rollback();
               }
           }
           finally
           {
              Connect.Close();     // ERROR in this line !!!
              Connect.Dispose();
           }
       }
       catch(Exception e)
       {
            stResult=2;
       }
      return stResult;
}

The error message is: "Object reference not set to an instance of an
object".

If I write in connection string "Pooling=false", all work correct.

I test this code on FB 1.5 CS and SS, on local computer and in LAN - the
exception is rased.

Can you send me you example on C#?

Best regards, Alex Shevelev                         mailto:she...@fo...

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Backup and Restore Problem

[Michael B. <mbr...@gw...>]

Hi,

same problem here...
We receive the message: No Message for Code 9 found.

We are using Firebird.NET Provider 1.5.2
We tested it on Win2k, WinXP
Only used 1 server.

2 workstations: Win2k
2 workstations: WinXP

on 2 wk's the application does the backup
on the other 2 not.

If there is someone with a solution...we need help :)

Best regards,

Michael Brotrück


""Phillip Cannon"" <phi...@ba...> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:002e01c4156d$46ae1990$3501a8c0@PHILLIP...
> Hi,
>
> There are some differences in the versions and installations but still
> two computers can have the exact same installation  and still the
> program will work on one and not the other. I have tried installing the
> latest version of Firebird with all seetings the same as those on the
> computer in which I wrote the program and still no luck.
>
> Cheers
> Phil
>
> "Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez" <car...@te...> wrote in message
> news:<406...@te...>...
> > Hello:
> >=20
> > > We always use the default Username and Password to log onto our=20
> > > databases, SYSDBA as the username and masterkey as the password.=20
> > > This is what makes me really doubt that this is a login problem. The
>
> > > program has been made so other users name and passwords can be used=20
> > > but we never do.
> >=20
> > Strange, there no other differences ?? I mean installations of Super=20
> > and
> > Classic server ??
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > --
> > Best regards
> >=20
> > Carlos Guzm=E1n =E1lvarez
> > Vigo-Spain
> >=20
> >=20
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> > Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of=20
> > GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system=20
> > =
> administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D1470&alloc_id=3D3638&op=3Dcli=
> ck
> > _______________________________________________
> > Firebird-net-provider mailing list=20
> > Fir...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
> >=20
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
> Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
> GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
> administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

> The assemblys are released without the DEBUG define and with use the 
> /debug switch
> for emit the debug information.

Sorry i mean without the /debug switch





--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>I agree with Mike and he express it much better than I did.  While I appreciate the technology of the provider -- *compatiblity* -- it most important factor for Firebird adoption.  In fact both Mono and DotGnu has both made compatibility with Microsoft.NET behavior its most paramount feature -- and for a good reason -- migration to Linux.
>
>I worked as a member of the Microsoft.NET/CLR team (Interop) and I can tell you Microsoft is formatible with their marketing strategy.  If you want Firebird to be adopted you should do everything in your power to be behaviorially compatible with the SqlServer provider such that adoption and migration is as seemless as possible.
>
I know that ;) and that is the reason the provider has named parameters 
with the
same sintax as SqlServer, stored procedure execution using only the sp 
name as
in SqlServer,  implicit transaction support and batch querys (that for 
now are
only in ExecuteReader)

>This is why I think you should also adopt my Guid request as many shop will be reluctant to use Firebird just on this *resolvable* the issue of compatibility.
>
I'm thinking on it, but was is needed for this is not only to modify the 
GdsReader/GdsWriter
implementation (XdrStream in 1.6), it's needed to define a new type in 
FbDbType enum
(and DbDatatype), implement the FbDataReader.GetGuid() ...

>However you do *not* need to throw an exception for ConnectionTimeout and Cancel because they do nothing to affect the mainline codepath.  They are stubs.  You can do an Assert (in the debug build) to notify the developer. 
>
The assemblys are released without the DEBUG define and with use the 
/debug switch
for emit the debug information.

In my opinion ( maybe i'm worng ) the exception is needed as soon as
it's not supported, the other option is to make the same as MS does
in the OracleClient provider with the CommandTimeout property.

I don't have problem on remove the exception, but without it people
is going to ask why it's not working, i'm sure about this and
i want to avoid it ;)

>Remember the Firebird .NET provider is not a closed source binary delivery it is an open source delivery with excellent documenation.  The fact that they are stub merely be placed in the documentation.
>
I know ;) and all suggestions and ideas for the .NET provider 
development are more
than wellcome




--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[<ch...@co...>]

I agree with Mike and he express it much better than I did.  While I appreciate the technology of the provider -- *compatiblity* -- it most important factor for Firebird adoption.  In fact both Mono and DotGnu has both made compatibility with Microsoft.NET behavior its most paramount feature -- and for a good reason -- migration to Linux.

I worked as a member of the Microsoft.NET/CLR team (Interop) and I can tell you Microsoft is formatible with their marketing strategy.  If you want Firebird to be adopted you should do everything in your power to be behaviorially compatible with the SqlServer provider such that adoption and migration is as seemless as possible.

This is why I think you should also adopt my Guid request as many shop will be reluctant to use Firebird just on this *resolvable* the issue of compatibility.

However you do *not* need to throw an exception for ConnectionTimeout and Cancel because they do nothing to affect the mainline codepath.  They are stubs.  You can do an Assert (in the debug build) to notify the developer.  The connection string idea is flawed because you can create a DbConnection without the connection string and call ConnectionTimeout before settting the connection string...

FbConnection conn = new FbConnection();
conn.ConnectionTimeout = 100;  // Bad: throw or not to throw?

Remember the Firebird .NET provider is not a closed source binary delivery it is an open source delivery with excellent documenation.  The fact that they are stub merely be placed in the documentation.


Thanks,
ChrisWa.

>  >> I think the best for you will be to handle the NotSupported exception
> (other providers may throw it too)  <<
> 
> This is the important point: what do other providers do? If none of them 
> throw an exception, then the Firebird provider shouldn't. If some do and 
> some don't, then it's a matter of opinion, but if the most common ones, 
> e.g. SQL Server, don't then probably FB shouldn't either.
> 
> I agree with Carlos that it *should* throw an exception, but no provider 
> is an island so to speak, and we must think about compatibility with 
> other providers.
> 
> Can't you add an option in the connection string to switch off 
> exceptions in this one case? That way, anyone wanting to switch 
> providers just has to add one line to the connection string, and it'll 
> work like some other providers.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mike.
> 

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

> This is the important point: what do other providers do? If none of 
> them throw an exception, then the Firebird provider shouldn't. If some 
> do and some don't, then it's a matter of opinion, but if the most 
> common ones, e.g. SQL Server, don't then probably FB shouldn't either.


Reviewing the .NET 1.1 documentation we can see that:

* SqlClient, Odbc and OleDb providers has CommandTimeout, none of them
throws
exception

* OracleClient doesn't have CommandTimeout property as public, it
will be accesible making explicit usage of the IDbCommand interface:

    ((IDbCommand)oracommand).CommandTimeout = 10;

Making that doesn't throw exception.

That from the Microsft providers, from the opensource ones for other RDBMS,
there are at least one that throws exception.

I think that probably the best will be to make the same as the OracleClient
provider.


Opinions ??




--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán álvarez
Vigo-Spain

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[Mike S. <mi...@mi...>]

 >> I think the best for you will be to handle the NotSupported exception
(other providers may throw it too)  <<

This is the important point: what do other providers do? If none of them 
throw an exception, then the Firebird provider shouldn't. If some do and 
some don't, then it's a matter of opinion, but if the most common ones, 
e.g. SQL Server, don't then probably FB shouldn't either.

I agree with Carlos that it *should* throw an exception, but no provider 
is an island so to speak, and we must think about compatibility with 
other providers.

Can't you add an option in the connection string to switch off 
exceptions in this one case? That way, anyone wanting to switch 
providers just has to add one line to the connection string, and it'll 
work like some other providers.

Cheers,

Mike.

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez wrote:

> Hello:
>
>> In the database project that I've previously mention I had to write a 
>> persistance layer that wraps the Firebird.NET provider.  The reason 
>> is that I can write to my persistance layer for both Firebird and 
>> possibly SQLServer and other DB's.  A situation could arise whereby 
>> data could be obtained from disparate databases.
>>
>> The problem is that SQLServer provider supports ConnectionTimeout and 
>> the Firebird provider throws an exception.  My request is that 
>> ConnectionTimeout rather than throw a runtime exeception to return 0 
>> and use an Assert instead.
>>
>> Once again I modified the provider to return 0 causing no behavioral 
>> changes to the provider but now my layer can work polymorphically.
>>
> Do you mean FbCommand.CommandTimeout ?? I'm not going to change that,
> at least for now, in my opinion that will give the false impression that
> it's supported and that it works, and it fact if you are going to use
> the CommandTimeout property probably you will be trying to call Cancel
> that will raise an NotSupported exception as well.
>
> I think the best for you will be to handle the NotSupported exception
> (other providers may throw it too)
>
>
> Opinions ??
>
>
>
> -- 
> Best regards
>
> Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
> Vigo-Spain
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
> Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 
> 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Firebird-net-provider mailing list
> Fir...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider
>
>
>

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Please remove exception in ConnectionTimeout

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>In the database project that I've previously mention I had to write a persistance layer that wraps the Firebird.NET provider.  The reason is that I can write to my persistance layer for both Firebird and possibly SQLServer and other DB's.  A situation could arise whereby data could be obtained from disparate databases.
>
>The problem is that SQLServer provider supports ConnectionTimeout and the Firebird provider throws an exception.  My request is that ConnectionTimeout rather than throw a runtime exeception to return 0 and use an Assert instead.
>
>Once again I modified the provider to return 0 causing no behavioral changes to the provider but now my layer can work polymorphically.
>
Do you mean FbCommand.CommandTimeout ?? I'm not going to change that,
at least for now, in my opinion that will give the false impression that
it's supported and that it works, and it fact if you are going to use
the CommandTimeout property probably you will be trying to call Cancel
that will raise an NotSupported exception as well.

I think the best for you will be to handle the NotSupported exception
(other providers may throw it too)


Opinions ??



--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] DateTime conversion in Firebird.NET

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>	Is it possible for you to back-port the milliseconds support to
>the 
>1.5 code base.  Since 1.6 is still in beta (and thus technically
>unfinished) 
>I would rather have the fix with a stable code base or do you feel that
>1.6 is stable enough to use now?
>
I was thinking on left it on 1.6 only, but probably i will try to backport
it when 1.6 reaches RC, if it's not difficult to backport i will do that
(differeces between both source versions are really great right now).




--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain

RE: [Firebird-net-provider] DateTime conversion in Firebird.NET

[Chris W. <ch...@co...>]

Carlos,
	Is it possible for you to back-port the milliseconds support to
the=20
1.5 code base.  Since 1.6 is still in beta (and thus technically
unfinished)=20
I would rather have the fix with a stable code base or do you feel that
1.6 is stable enough to use now?

Thanks,
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: fir...@li...
[mailto:fir...@li...] On Behalf Of
Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:46 AM
To: Chris Waldron
Cc: 'Firebird ADO.NET Data Provider'
Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] DateTime conversion in Firebird.NET

Hello:

> 	Since all I need is hh:mm:ss precision then what I have to do to
>work around this issue is to specifically check hours, minute and
>seconds rather than default to the tick counts until you've implemented
>milliseconds support in V1.6
>
This is implemented in 1.6 yet.






--
Best regards

Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez
Vigo-Spain


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.

Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick
_______________________________________________
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Fir...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

>	This is not a "real" solution but it is a "real" solution for
>those who use GUID as OIDs and looking to migrate from SQL Server to
>Firebird.  This is why I suggested having a *compiler flag* -- this is
>open source :-).
>
Ok, i will think on this, huummm ... opnions are wellcome ;)






--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-spain

RE: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

[Chris W. <ch...@co...>]

Correct.

	This is not a "real" solution but it is a "real" solution for
those who use GUID as OIDs and looking to migrate from SQL Server to
Firebird.  This is why I suggested having a *compiler flag* -- this is
open source :-).

What I like about open source is that you can construct "real" solutions
that are inconceivable with closed source giving programmers a greater
degree of flexibility.

Clearly if the application/db developer has to support CHAR(16) this
suggestion is of no use but if this is new development -- such as what I
am engaged -- or even a migration project from SqlServer to Firebird --
this "solution" can help speed adoption of Firebird.  I've seen issues
like this used as an excuse or stumbling block.

Of course the "real" solution is for Firebird to support Guids but
taking a cursory glance at their bug/feature list I don't think Guid
support is a high priority task item for them.

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lvarez [mailto:car...@te...]=20
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:54 AM
To: ch...@co...
Cc: Peter Jacobi; fir...@li...
Subject: Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Guid Support

Hello:

>The only issue is reading from Firebird into the .NET provider as it
will "think" a GUID is a Firebird TEXT type.  The way for the provider
to distinguish that the data coming across is a guid is for the provider
to check the size.  If the data is TEXT by and size is 16 then assume a
GUID and convert the byte stream to a GUID -- wal-la!
>

That is what i was thinking you are doing for implement it,
but that isn't a real solution as people can have a CHAR(16)
field that isn't used for Guid ;)






--
Best regards

Carlos Guzm=E1n =C1lavrze
Vigo-Spain

[Firebird-net-provider] CVS sources are ready for testing

[<car...@te...>]

Hello:

After a good amount of changes and some days that the CVS sources was
really unstable ;), the CVS sources are ready for testing one more time.




--
Best regards

Carlos Guzmán Álvarez
Vigo-Spain