Hello

Is there a way to implement a mini dbisam server without using a
configuration file and without the possibility for remote administration?

The idea is to build a tiny and very simple server for a small client
server application that has just one database and one defined database user
- all clients connect to the database with the same user.

An admin with access to the server application can only set the server port
and the location of the database files. I intend to store these parameters
in the registry and initialise the server by directly calling/setting the
approppiate methods and properties of a TDBISAMEngine-Component by myself.

Currently I intend to do the following steps...

1. initialize an inactive TDBISAMEngine (instance myEngine)
2. Starting server : myEngine.Active:=true;
3. Stopping admin : myEngine.StopAdminServer;
4. Adding db and user : myEngine.AddServerDatabase;myEngine.AddServerUser;
myEngine.AddServerDatabaseUser

The procedure works, but only for the first time because in the meanwhile
cfg-file has been written in which the db, user and other configuration
details has been saved.

Setting the ConfigFileName to '' does not work because a default file name
is used in this case.

Do I really have to delete the config file each time I start the
application?

Any comments are appreciated.

Regards

--
Andreas Kardin - Software Developer - E-Mail : mail@mephzara.com
- Main Web Site                 : www.mephzara.com
- Particle Systems Screen Saver : www.mephzara.com/particle-systems/

Andreas,

<< Do I really have to delete the config file each time I start the
application? >>

Unfortunately, yes.  DBISAM wants to write out the configuration file any
time there is a change to the configuration.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Tim Young [Elevate Software] wrote :

[...]
> Unfortunately, yes.  DBISAM wants to write out the configuration file
> any time there is a change to the configuration.

Thank you for the fast reply.

I'm not completely happy with that but I can live with it The
ServerConfigFileName can also be set to a filepath (I did not realize that
at the first glimpse) and that allows to control where the file will be
written.

Regards

--
Andreas Kardin - Software Developer - E-Mail : mail@mephzara.com
- Main Web Site                 : www.mephzara.com
- Particle Systems Screen Saver : www.mephzara.com/particle-systems/

Tim Young [Elevate Software] wrote :

[...]
> << Do I really have to delete the config file each time I start the
> application? >>
>
> Unfortunately, yes.  DBISAM wants to write out the configuration file
> any time there is a change to the configuration.

I just want to mention a "nice" side effect on my system (XP Prof SP2). The
..scf extension is registered as "Windows Explorer Shell Command File". The
extension is *not* shown in the windows explorer even *with* activated
display of extensions in general. I see only the bare filename.

That was quite confusing : my program tried to delete a nonexisting file
(because I took the filename without extension as seen in the explorer) but
the dbisam engine did read that config file because the engine added the
extension internally.

I think scf is not a very good choice for a file extension What about
the possibilty to change also the extension for server configuration files?

Regards

--
Andreas Kardin - Software Developer - E-Mail : mail@mephzara.com
- Main Web Site                 : www.mephzara.com
- Particle Systems Screen Saver : www.mephzara.com/particle-systems/

> Do I really have to delete the config file each time I start the
> application?

I don't delete the config file each time I start, I re-apply my
configuration _if the stored configuration is wrong_.

e.g. I check the list of registered databases and add mine if its missing.

That way its contents are irrelevant and you can stick it in a temp
directory and not worry about it.


  Oliver

Andreas,

<< I think scf is not a very good choice for a file extension What about
the possibilty to change also the extension for server configuration files?
>>

I'll see what I can do, but it might be a fairly significant change.  File
extensions are one of our biggest headaches simply because it's like domain
names, chances are no matter what you pick there's going to be something out
there that uses it.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com