Subject | Re[3]: [IBO] Possible Bug in Parser: Sub-Selects with Integer and Date Fields In Firebird |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2003-07-10T22:28:35Z |
At 01:41 PM 10/07/2003 -0300, you wrote:
in 1.5, I think I know what your problem is.
1.5 fixed a bug that has always been in IB and Firebird up till now, where
mixed-table query parameters would get their order confused.
There is a configuration parameter in firebird.conf (commented out) that
forces FB 1.5 to use this old, confused ordering. In 1.5 you would have
needed to uncomment this config parameter (OldParameterOrdering) and set it
to True (1), to get the params in the "correct" order to be compatible with
Fb 1.0 and InterBase. But you didn't, and so the persistent params objects
are set up in your app using this "incorrect" (but really correct!) ordering.
For going back to 1.0, you will need to delete your query and add it again
while connected to the 1.0 server, and let the params be reconstructed.
Helen
>Helen, the truth is I was writed this select in firebird 1.5 and I needOK, now that I know you are using a TIBOQuery and that you wrote the query
>re-write for FB 1.0 - and IBO result error
in 1.5, I think I know what your problem is.
1.5 fixed a bug that has always been in IB and Firebird up till now, where
mixed-table query parameters would get their order confused.
There is a configuration parameter in firebird.conf (commented out) that
forces FB 1.5 to use this old, confused ordering. In 1.5 you would have
needed to uncomment this config parameter (OldParameterOrdering) and set it
to True (1), to get the params in the "correct" order to be compatible with
Fb 1.0 and InterBase. But you didn't, and so the persistent params objects
are set up in your app using this "incorrect" (but really correct!) ordering.
For going back to 1.0, you will need to delete your query and add it again
while connected to the 1.0 server, and let the params be reconstructed.
Helen