> >
> > I know Ann has on the architect list proposed a method "to allow two
> > systems that share alignment rules and datatypes to access the same
> > database, even if the systems have different endian rules".
> >
> > > I was aware of Firebird's ability to have the database copied

from a

> > > local machine, where it was being used solely by one person, to

another

> > > location to be 'shared' by a server. I just wondered how far it

went.

> >
> > Let me clear this up.
> >
> > You should *never* take a file system copy of a database while the
> > 'server' is running. Running means different things to different
> > models. In some models, even if there are no users connected, the
> > engine could be finishing up some garbage collection.
> >
> > Copying a database while it is 'in use' can cause:
>
> You appear to have missed the part where I said that I would not copy
> mysql databases while the server is running. You really think I would
> have happily made corrupt copies of tables holding hundreds of

thousands

> of rows of user account and mailbox information and put them into
> production huh?

What has MySQL got to do with Firebird? Just because something is
possible on one does not mean it is a good idea on the other. Even if
it is a bad idea under both, that does not mean that you will suffer
the same consequences.

Oh, and I am impressed that you have hundreds of thousands of rows, it
is not like anyone else here deals with that much data.

>
> >
> > * Inconsistent data in target.
> > (just look at careful writes, there is no way your FS is doing that -
> > http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&page=ibp_expert3
> > <http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&page=ibp_expert3> )
> > * Server crash
> > * Reportedly can corrupt source
> >
> > The GBAK tool and services API both provide methods of backing up a
> > database while the server is running. There are also third party
> > options like DBAK (not sure about whether there is a Linux port

though).

> >
> > There is a new NBACKUP tool that makes the appropriate changes to
> > allow a file system copy.
> >
> > There are massive performance benefits to a freshly restored database
> > over one simply file copied. Nice balanced indices and no garbage.
>
>
> Hello, we are talking about the Linux side of things. I suppose you

want

> to contradict Nando's point about the security2.fdb user database
> presence before a backup or restore is possible.

Yes, contradicting Nando is my goal in life? Seriously get a grip.

The security database is a special database that one does not normally
just copy around. It is usually not going to be particularly large
either compared to your hundred gazzillion row user account
information database, so I don't see the problem in including two on
your CD.

Adam