--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, Alexandre Benson Smith
<iblist@t...> wrote:

> Jonathan Hull wrote:
>
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I would like to have my cake and eat it too, in that I would like

my

> >application to use a Firebird 1.5 service on an alternate port for

my

> >exclusive use, while not conflicting with a different Firebird 1.5
> >service to exist on the standard 3050.
> >
> >Ideally I would envisage a situation similar to Apache, where the
> >service name can be supplied as a parameter to the executable on
> >execution.
> >
> >Does anyone know if there are any architectural reasons why this
> >can't happen, or if this is possible, or if with a simple bit of

code

> >change it could be achieved? It would most definitely save me the
> >concern of whether a Firebird is installed, and what version etc.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Jono
> >
> >
> Hi Jono,
>
> This was discussed by Artur Anjos last days with someone that has a
> problem very similar to yours.
>
> Take a look on the messages from the past few days.
>
> There is a file under your firebird root instalation directory

named

> firebird.conf, there you could change the port where fb will listen

on.

>
> The client connection string should be somthing like this:
> "server_name/port_number:path_to_database"
> "myserver/3051:/home/bd/test.fdb" for unices
> "myserver/3051:c:\mydata\test.fdb" for windows
>
> Simple as that... ;-)
>
> see you !
>
> --
>
> Alexandre Benson Smith
> Development
> THOR Software e Comercial Ltda.
> Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil
> www.thorsoftware.com.br

Thanks for that Alaxandre.

I guess the Embedded Server is what I am looking for, as all remote
DB application connections are being routed through a remote and
local Apache web server (with query + results batching, compression,
encryption etc), so Apache can be the 'data server' and fbembed.dll
can service the actual queries that Apache issues.

This has an excellent side effect of requiring no port at all for FB
(only the Apache port) so Firewall config is halved.

The only issue I have is that of security. Am I right in
interpreting from the documentation that any username / password can
be used, and it is the DB permissions that enforce security?

Cheers,
Jono