At 05:08 PM 30/11/2008, you wrote:

>Dear Helen,
>Your detailed explanation of how the Firebird client/server system
>works was very valuable.
>Most importantly, the example path you have provided:
>
>> MAINSERVER/3051:C:\Data\databasename.fdb
>
>was the answer I was looking for: it solved all the problems with the
>connection to the SBS server. Thank you so much !
>
>You have questioned the use of non-standard port 3051. I know that the
>standard port is 3050, however long time ago I was advised to use a
>different port 3051 to avoid problems with an Interbase server and/or
>other older version of Firebird running on the same machine?
>Is it valid to use different port in these particular cases, or is it
>irrelevant ?

Of course it is valid. Firebird with its default port configuration won't work if you install it on a server that is running something else that's already using port 3050 - such as the Citrix Edgesight monitoring utility, which runs its own Firebird superserver out of port 3050.

The same way, if you configure Fb to listen on port 3051, there's a better than average chance it will conflict with something else on port 3051. So, while we use port 3051 "for example's sake", if you are deploying your system into environments that are not under your control, you do everyone a favour by heading for the high-range port numbers and lengthen the odds for a clash.

>What are the true reasons for using different listening port ?

Because two different applications on a host machine cannot listen on the same port. Period. "First up, best dressed" as we used to say in our house. (I have two sisters.)

>If I was going to use the standard port 3050, would it be still
>necessary to provide the /3050 switch after the server name, or does
>it become redundant ?

It is the default, so if you are sticking with port 3050, it is redundant to supply the port number.

./heLen