Subject | Re: [firebird-support] DDL Question |
---|---|
Author | Woody |
Post date | 2007-08-07T15:27:43Z |
From: "Svein Erling Tysvær" <svein.erling.tysvaer@...>
problems, only extra entries left around in the system tables. However, any
problems, large or small, that can be avoided by sticking to my policy of no
DDL on a live database make my life easier. I'm fortunate not to have any 24
hour live databases at the moment so there is always a time span at night
where I can do any DDL work without worrying.
Thanks,
Woody (TMW)
> Hi Woody!I remember the discussion well. IIRC, you didn't experience any discernable
>
> Around 23 July, I wrote a message to this list with the subject "Fb
> 1.5.4 - RDB$RELATION_FIELDS not in RDB$RELATIONS". In short, the problem
> was that there were records in RDB$RELATION_FIELDS and
> RDB$RELATION_CONSTRAINTS (I think) that were referring to a deleted table.
> This occurred when we created a table and a stored procedure or trigger (I
> don't remember which of them), then deleted the table/procedure and
> recreated them with a new table name. It was done on a database with
> several users simultaneously doing DML, but no-one touching the
> table/procedure in question.
>
problems, only extra entries left around in the system tables. However, any
problems, large or small, that can be avoided by sticking to my policy of no
DDL on a live database make my life easier. I'm fortunate not to have any 24
hour live databases at the moment so there is always a time span at night
where I can do any DDL work without worrying.
Thanks,
Woody (TMW)