1

Topic: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

I plan transfer of the project with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or at once 3.0
As it to do at itself on a computer - read in
But in advance I want to understand as me it then to do on computers of clients? Whether it is possible and how more correctly to automate it?
Case 1:
The client to which it is possible to arrive,  basis on former fb, to delete former, to deliver new,
Here if something does not turn out - it is possible to return all back. It is possible former not to delete, and simply to stop if it is necessary to leave  ports for operation. So?
Case 2:
The client to which it is possible to send only  updates. And even on  to it not to be hooked. Here as?
Bases different from 100 to 600

--
To understand that you something you do not know - wisely;
To understand that you at all you do not know that something you do not know - it is sad,
But it is the fact which  is very useful for understanding :-)

2

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

at each update of basis is a mandatory first step.
Further: I would make an installer with two scenarios. 1. Parallel setting (at least for sanity check), 2. Changeover of the current version. If 1 fulfilled normally, tests transited, it is possible and to replace. And it is possible and to leave, to the discretion of the client.
P.S.Pereezd is connected to needs or is simple so?

3

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

wadman wrote:

P.S.Pereezd is connected to needs or is simple so?

To develop the project it is necessary, and on  already laziness, I want to creep on c#, Net
With linq2db fb2.0 does not want to fly up, clever people recommended to creep on the version above not to fight with old crutches

4

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

wadman;
It turns out without high-grade setting of the full version on the client not to manage?
Shamanism with embedded versions not probably?

5

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

LelikBolek;
.net with embedded works not so to put it mildly

6

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

Denis wrote:

.net with embedded works not so to put it mildly

I meant at the moment of passage to the new version fb
That that in  fb in embedded versions badly with.Net is the bad news...
application at half of clients works for me with embedded the version
Can hardly more in detail about problems tell?

7

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

LelikBolek;
ADO.net the provider works independently without usage fbclient.dll, for it it is a normal operation mode. Usage embedded is possible, but this case already it is necessary to cling exterior , it not native for.net a mode  it is much worse

8

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

wrote:

creep on MS SQL.

Such  in times longer and more difficult
At me it is a lot of logic in procedures and triggers fb, to rewrite this all taking into account nuances  which it will be explicit much - I am afraid not to master in real periods
And here to rewrite the client, and further already to develop f-tsional with a sheaf with web is that where I want....

9

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

LelikBolek wrote:

such  in times longer and more difficult

No. Simply complexities are concentrated only on the first step. And at usage.NET with
Something distinct from MS SQL they are spread on all way by an equal thick layer. If you want
To use.NET forget about any other DBMS except MS SQL.

10

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:

If you want to use.NET forget about any other DBMS except MS SQL.

Did not think that all so badly ((it is direct the unexpected statement?
Someone else can expresses about it?

11

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

wrote:

Yes it is fine. There is a small project, without a special delicacy, for small and average business. On a small slice of oil suffices. If to creep on MS SQL cost of licenses will be other-wordly. And for their absence - eBoot-sss.

Yes it is fine.
For small projects there is a SQL Server 2017 Express edition which allows
Build small, data-driven web and mobile applications up to 10 GB in size with this entry-level database.
And which Available for free.

12

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

13

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

the non-believer wrote:

it is passed...
Yes it is fine.
For small projects there is a SQL Server 2017 Express edition which allows
Build small, data-driven web and mobile applications up to 10 GB in size with this entry-level database.
And which Available for free.

You would sound all restrictions of version Express edition. The size of basis in 10 Gig not the greatest problem.

14

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI wrote:

you would sound all restrictions of version Express edition. The size of basis in 10 Gig not the greatest problem.

Et to it also server Windows submit...

15

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI;
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-ser … 7-editions

16

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

the non-believer wrote:

KreatorXXI;
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-ser … 7-editions

I about that also speak - cut off to impossibility and what want? Marketing, ostensibly.

17

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI wrote:

cut off to impossibility

and in what impossibility?

18

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

LelikBolek;
I would be strained by restriction in 4 kernels and in storage  in ones and a half . By the way, earlier 1 Gig only was supported. Progress on the person.

19

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI wrote:

I would be strained by restriction in 4 kernels and in storage  in ones and a half .

Restriction 32 bit Firebird SS on one kernel and  a cache you do not strain?.

20

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

I on operation should work with msssql, and on the personal project  firebird and my output that as though mssql it was not mighty and abrupt, but firebird to me simply it is more convenient, beginning from more pleasant TSQL and finishing super tool IBExpert and to change this sheaf oh as it would not be desirable (((

21

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI wrote:

I about that also speak - cut off to impossibility and what want? Marketing, ostensibly.

the non-believer wrote:

...
For small projects there is a SQL Server 2017 Express edition
...

22

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

;
Here it is interesting, what store there?

23

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

;
Well, variants ///... Separate talk. It is quite enough for "normal" operation of 10 Gig.

24

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

KreatorXXI wrote:

it is quite enough For "normal" operation of 10 Gig.

640 kilobyte suffices all.
[spoiler] Aha, the basis with  for  passed ShchaZZZ very long ago, and without  to   drives. [/spoiler]

25

Re: Moving with fb 2.0 on 2.5 or on 3

the non-believer wrote:

it is passed...
it is passed...

MSSQL even Express - it is necessary to install.
And if so - it is possible to install that and not-embed FB. Then also problems with.Net special are not present.