> Helen, Vlad and the others:
>
> Speaking about performance, in a microsoft page
> (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa178138(SQL.80).aspx) I read that
> in a LAN, named pipes and TCP/IP are similar (or perhaps named pipes are
> faster; it is not completely clear for me), but in a WAN, named pipes are
> slower. In my case the users are in a local network or they access by
> terminal server to the server. So it seems to be a good idea to use named
> pipes.

Just recalled - Named Pipes allowed only 255 instance of pipe. I.e. you will
have limitation in 255 simultaneous Named Pipes connections. And, of course,
client OS can't create Named Pipe instance, i.e. you can't run Firebird at Win9x
and use Named Pipe's connections.

> Speaking about security, I don´t think that NOD32 ignores named pipes. The
> difference is that it doesn´t limit the quantity of "connections" as it
> apparently does with TCP/IP. Anyway in both cases I am using aliases. This
> means that I am using host:alias or \\host\alias so in both cases NOD32 has
> no "file" to scan and in both cases I am using port 3050. So I guess there
> might be no difference in this subject.

Its not about files, its about sockets. To handle N TCP\IP connections, Firebird
call select() and put N+1 socket's into it. Obviously, NOD32 intercept TCP stack and
somewhere calls WaitForMultiplyObjects with this socket's. This API have limitation
in 64 handles, therefore the issue. Is it clear now ?

Regards,
Vlad