Leyne, Sean escribió:

> Jorge,
>
>
>> I dont fully agree with you.
>>
>
> Too bad the SQL committee doesn't agree with you.
>
> *You* are responsible for ensuring that existing data is updated to meet
> any new constraints that you add.
>

Believe me, I still dont understand why a so simple thing goes so
cumplicated! I'm talking about SQL, I'm talking about a backup tool,
which refuses to restore a backup with non-valid data, but make a backup
of the same data without any warnings ...

>
>> If the process can be improved, why dont do?
>> I've set my new field as "not null default = 0".
>>
>
> "Default" only applies to records which are INSERTed. Not to existing
> records.
>

Ok, then the best idea is to allow the user add a field, define it as
not null, dont get any warning, backup that DB without any warning, and
deny the restore when needed ... that's great! :)

>
>
>> I dont know how other DB engines resolves that problems, but I'm prety
>> sure that dont do what gbak does (At least SQL Server doesnt).
>>
>
> There is a gbak option which allows for restores without enforcing
> constraints. Have you tried this?
>

Yes, it deletes all database constraints. Nice also!

D. Yemanov was more helpful: it suggest me to try nbackup. Better than
gbak, even when a "mix" of both would be great: gbak "sweep" task +
nbackup "restore that what has backed up"

Dont missunderstand me: I´m always want to get a better Firebird. I´m
not against SQL or anyone, I´m against the useless discussions about
what can be resolved easily (maybe) :)

>
> Sean
>
>

--
Jorge Andres Brugger