"Jason Chapman (JAC2)" wrote:

>
> > It has never been recommended to directly use a database created by an
> > earlier version with a new server.
> I must have missed something then. I thought then FB (over and above IB6)
> supported this.

No - you didn't miss anything. This discussion is really about
establishing best practice. From my 'support' perspective it is natural
to recommend the more conservative approach. After all, there is no
testing done with the engine against ODS9 databases. It is hard enough
trying to catch all the possible combinations with ODS10 and two
dialects.

> We have 4 versions of the same DB, 1 live administration (owns 50% of the
> DB), 1 live accounts DB (owns 50% of the DB), 1 backup DB and 1 reporting
> DB. I was going to introduce FB in a least risk path i.e. Reporting (for a
> week), Backup (for a week), Accounts (for a week), then Admin. This will
> give me more test results that I can generate in the lab in terms of
> performance, concurrency, long term effects of the server being up etc etc.
>
> Anyway, don't want to make a big deal about it, it was just my plan, will
> now amend.
>

Yes, you have an interesting migration challenge there.


Paul
--

Paul Reeves
http://www.ibphoenix.com
taking InterBase further