Helen,

My customers are used to making copies of their database for testing
purposes, and sometimes they make multiple copies. They even switch
from server to local. But until now they do so using an msaccess
database. This is a very user-friendly database: you can connect to
any database you like on any server you like ( as long the network-
connection is stable).

At the moment I'm converting this application to FB 1.5 and I want to
stay as close as possible to the user-interface my customers are used
to, but I don't want to corrupt FB or decent CS-programming. That's
why I ask this many questions, just to be able to make a right
balance between the freedom of MSACCESS versus FB.

I now know for instance that trying to make a copy of a FB database
in use could corrupt the database (not so with msaccess) and it would
be safer to make a copy using GBAK (and restore).

Greetings,

Leon

Leon

--- In ib-support@yahoogroups.com, Helen Borrie <helebor@t...> wrote:
> At 08:10 AM 12/03/2003 +0000, you wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I think once there were possible corruption-problems in interbase
if
> >two clients connected to the same database using different ways.
> >1. using the driveletter ( h:\database.gdb )
> >2. using the servername
> >3. using the IP-adress
> >
> >Is wonder if this is still the case ?
>
> It never was the case.
>
> InterBase (but not Firebird) will cause problems if one connection
connects
> to a Windows server using a PATH in the "legal" format
> (d:\path\database.gdb) while another connects with the "illegal"
format
> (d:path\database.gdb). Windows passes each connection string to
the server
> as if the connections were being made to *different* databases. As
soon as
> these connections do any DML, you get serious corruption.
>
> With Firebird, as soon as one connection has been made, any
connection
> using the other string format will be refused. This protects the
> data; but it will make a careless programmer pretty unpopular with
his
> customers.
>
> With the correct network setup, connections can be made safely to
any or
> all three of your items 1), 2) and 3) above.
>
> >My users are able to connect to
> >a different database by browsing, and chances are really big that
> >this will result in a different way of connecting to the same
database
>
> If you are saying that your users are allowed to connect freely to
any
> database they choose, and enter their own connection strings, then,
sure,
> you have filled their kegs with gunpowder.
>
> Otherwise - it's up to you to write safe code in the client apps
you give them.
>
> heLen