Hi Brad,

> I was wondering about the rational behind the isc4.gdb
> database for storing
> the user names. Its seems to complicate things a fair bit
> and would seem
> easier to me if the user information for a database was
> stored inside the
> database's own .gdb file. Perhaps its just because I'm used
> to it working
> that way in Sybase SQL Anywhere but to me this seems easier.
> The separate
> user database buys you easier configuration for a lot of
> databases but at
> some costs that don't really seem worth the end result. Am I missing
> something here?

Analizing postings in the various IB-related lists, any discussions about
ISC4.GDB look a bit like religious wars ;-)
Seriously, as far as I can see, most of the community members agree that the
current implementation is bad and needs to be improved or even completely
re-designed. But the right way this thing should be done is still under
consideration.

> Examples of problems I have right now are:
>
> 1. Once a user is defined, they can connect to any database.
> Granted they
> won't be able to do much unless they have been given some
> access but I would
> prefer if they couldn't even connect to the database.
>
> 2. I can't just copy a database to another system without
> also bringing over
> the users which makes it more complicated. A backup of the
> database also
> doesn't include the users so restoring it on another system
> means I also have
> to bring over the users.
>
> 3. Single source of failure: if the isc4.gdb database gets
> corrupted, all the
> databases on the system are out of action for all users.

You should take into account the 4th well-known example: if anyone has
stolen your database, he can have full access to the one with his own copy
of ISC4.GDB.

Best regards,
Dmitry