Subject Re: [ib-support] Disappointed in Interbase (long)
Author Nico Callewaert
Really strange, I use IB_WISQL and never encountered any problem. We also
have a huge application running. Very weird !


Nico Callewaert

At 15:12 28/08/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Before I step onto my soapbox, let me say that I am an IB die-hard. I have
>been using IB since 4.2 and Delphi 2. I have found the tools a bit lacking,
>but apart from that, the ease of use with which you can manipulate ans
>scale DBs make IB the first choice for me. I have used IB in desktop as
>well as large C/S installations.
>We have encountered huge problems with using IB in our current project. So
>much so that we are considering using something else. What, I don't know
>yet. The problems we have encountered are of such a nature that it could
>potentially kill a project. If we are going about using IB incorrectly, I
>would like to know, and we will mend our ways, but the behaviour that we
>have encountered is unacceptable to me. I expect a RDBMS to survive under
>these conditions.
>Let me paint the picture....
>We are using IB5.6. We have a large production system running a
>world-leading production facility in South Africa. The customer is the
>largest producer of ostrich skins in the world. Our system (on IB) runs
>their entire production system. The system pushes probably about 100,000
>transactions through the DB per day. up to now, the system has been running
>'maintenance-free' for 5 years, bar the few hiccups now and then. Purely
>based on this track record, IB has excelled! I developed the current system
>largely on my own. I was the only one making DB updates.
>Our current project is expanding the system to include ordering, sales,
>invoicing, etc. We decided to stick to IB5.6 for now as it is certified,
>and it will not require a migration to a new version of IB.
>The new project involves a team of 10 developers each developing their part
>of the system. Each developer is using IBExpert to do the necessary
>metadata changes. These changes include table creation, adding/dropping
>columns altering SPs and triggers, etc. In short, we are hammering the DB
>with metadata changes. Unfortunately, it seems that IB does not like
>this... The typical problems we have encountered include:
>- Getting the 'Object in use' message. Then everybody has to log off and we
>have to do a backup & restore cycle to be able to use the
>index/table/SP/whatever again
>- Triggers not firing. Goodness knows why not.
>- SP not running correctly. We have had the following problem that really
>boggles the mind. We have also repeated this to make sure we are not making
>stupid mistakes. We compile a SP sucessfully. If we run it, the old version
>still runs. No matter how often we recompile the SP, it still runs a
>previous version. Then we all log off, do a Backup & Restore (B&R) and
>viola! the problem disappears and the correct version of the SP runs. We
>change the SP & compile and same problem happens. And this on the restored
>DB! We had to resort to B&R after each SP update & compile session. I can
>assure you that this is no fun..!
>- Triggers same as SPs.
>- Abnormal server terminations
>We had to install our new system last week. We had 3 developers on site
>making last minute changes. The same problems happened, even with one
>person doing metadata changes and continually doing B&Rs. It seems as if
>the DB is pretty trashed.... This causes so many problems for us as it
>almost made debugging a futile exercise. You never knew what you where
>going to get! You can imagine how this can kill a project....
>I have to admit that we initially made the connection string mistake, but
>we resolved that and did a B&R. We also did copy the DB all over the place
>on our network. The machines we are using are Win98SE, NT4 SP6 and Win2K
>Beta. If this is part of the problem, I will admit guilt. But why do the
>problems prevail even after a B&R and the DB staying on the server?
>I would like to know whether we are doing this incorrectly. For our new
>project, a completely different one, also IB5.6, we are assigning one
>person to do all metadata changes. This is not great, due to obvious
>reasons, but we feel safer with this approach.
>If anybody can shed some light on why we are having these problems, or how
>to go about things correctly, I would appreciate any suggestions. If we can
>solve these problems, I'd be more than happy to stay with IB. If we can't,
>then I would have to move to a more robust platform for our 'serious' &
>business critical applications.
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to