Subject Re: [Firebird-Architect] FB embedded in Linux
Author Ann W. Harrison
At 09:50 AM 11/18/2004, kartinku wrote:

> Requirement : My requirement is to connect to database in loca
>machine directly without server.

OK, no problem. That's what classic does.

>And to get multiple connection in
>that process.

Also no problem. Your application links with the classic
library, calls to the Firebird API are handled through the

> But each thread will have unique connection.


>connection will not be shared between threads.

And classic does all those things.

> so I decided to use embedded server.

Err... ok, but why do you want a server at all?

> I have tested using jaybird . I was able to get multiple connection
>through "FBWarppingdatasource" for local DB access in linux using
>Below are my doubts related to embedded support in linux .
>Q1: If "" is conceptually close to "fbembed.dll" in
>windows. Do I use it for my purpose as detailed in the "requirement"?

The goal of Firebird is to maintain an absolutely common API
and common database structure while offering different access
architectures for different application types. The choice of
access architecture should be transparent to your application.

>Q2 : Why there is no separate SS architecture based embedded build
>for linux like "fbembed.dll"in windows?

Because fbembed.dll was a workaround for the absence of classic
on windows and added the requirement of locking the database
to a single process. Classic would allow other processes to
connect to the database - like gbak for example - while your
application is running.

>Q3: Is classic server installation can used as embed server in linux?

There is no classic server - the classic architecture includes an
inet server that listens for connections. But if you don't want
to go through the network, there's no need for a server.