Re: [Firebird-devel] Planning the post v3 development

[Dmitry Y. <fir...@ya...>]

28.04.2014 23:31, Dalton Calford wrote:
>
>     Architecturally, Firebird database is not active without user
>     connections. This slightly changes with the LINGER support, but not so
>     much. So the question is who should be waiting for the timer events when
>     nobody is connected. And if it should be the server's (not the engine's)
>     feature, then what to do with the embedded setup?
>
> You should be able to define a database daemon/virtual user that runs as
> a separate transaction space.  If defined and active, the database
> would always be running.

Who should initiate that dedicated listener deamon/user after a server 
restart? Should the server attach all the databases itself to check 
whether one needs a startup? What about databases unknown to the server 
(not present in databases.conf)?

> Well, picture schema that can contain schema ie
>   database.schema_level1.schema_level2.schema_leveln.database_object.

I seriously doubt that hierarhical schemas is a good thing (tm). What 
does the SQL specification says in this regard? Schema is a standard 
feature, it makes a lot of sense to follow the standard here.

> In this case, you could attach the root of a remote database as a
> branch/schema to the current database.

This is completely different feature request, IMO. And honestly, I don't 
like auto-mounting of remote objects.

Imagine a remote database inaccessible. Should we forbid connections to 
our local database? Or invalidate only the remote schema? Or invalidate 
also all local PSQL objects referencing the unavailable schema?


Dmitry