Rua FB SS as an application (fbserver -a), so you can have as many instances
as you need.
I'm distributing my application this way and had no problems at all.

Regards,

Fabiano

On 1/25/07, Greg At ACD <GregAtACD@...> wrote:
>
> I have a question on how to best deal with the potential of multiple
> versions of the Firebird server residing on the same machine, and how
> to best deal with it.
>
> This is my situation:
>
> We are planning to ship a suite of desktop software products that will
> also install Firebird 2.0 SS on the desktop. All of the applications
> will require access to the database(s) hosted locally.
>
> We initially thought about using the embedded version of the database,
> but since we want to have multiple applications access this database,
> we need to install the SS (or CS) version instead.
>
> The nature of our products is that the user really has no idea that
> Firebird is even on the system; they are really just using our
> products which happen to use a local Firebird database in the
> background. Therefore the existence and maintenance of Firebird itself
> needs to be 'silent' as far as the user is concerned.
>
> Of course, we would like to play properly in the 'sandbox', so we need
> to deal with the scenario where FB 2.0 is already installed by another
> application, OR if an earlier version of FB (1.5 for example) is
> installed.
>
> If FB 2.0 is already there, then how do we use this when we likely
> won't know the credentials to add our own user information for the
> server? Can we run 2 or more servers side-by-side? Can the local (i.e.
> XNET) protocol be used in this case for performance reasons?
>
> We also need to deal with the situation where FB 1.5 (or earlier) is
> also installed. How do we implement this to allow existing clients not
> to be disrupted by our installation?
>
> What would be the set of 'best practices' for this scenario?
>
> Thx!
>
> Greg
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]