Tim

Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking this
to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t update
remotelly.

Eduardo

Eduardo,

<< Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking
this to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t
update remotelly. >>

Provided that the EDB beta is out this week, which things look good right
now, I should be able to do the next 4.x build by next Monday.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Thanks

Eduardo

"Tim Young [Elevate Software]" <timyoung@elevatesoft.com> wrote in message
news:2CEA5133-32D0-4633-AF11-DC623F5C1037@news.elevatesoft.com...
> Eduardo,
>
> << Is there any ETA for DBISAM 4.25 or DBISAM 4.24 build 2 ? I am asking
> this to schedule my visits to update servers, because some servers I can´t
> update remotelly. >>
>
> Provided that the EDB beta is out this week, which things look good right
> now, I should be able to do the next 4.x build by next Monday.
>
> --
> Tim Young
> Elevate Software
> www.elevatesoft.com
Just making sure this thread, or beter Tim's answer, is not lost in
digi-space <grin>

Frans,

<< Just making sure this thread, or beter Tim's answer, is not lost in
digi-space <grin>  >>

The delay is EDB - we ran into a binding issue during the testing of the
stored procedures and I've been working on correcting it.  On a related
note, we've had to punt on a few ANSI SQL/PSM items due to:

1) They're the worst sort of language constructs ever devised by man, such
as is the case with the way exception handling and diagnostics is done.  SQL
Server 2005 has it right with structured exception handling in blocks like
Delphi and every other modern language.  And anyone that sets up a system
where an attempt to navigate a cursor past the EOF raises an exception
should be shot. Can you imagine such a construct in Delphi's TDataSet
component ?

2) The binding issues involved with mixing DDL and DML are a mess, which is
is why Interbase simply doesn't allow DDL inside of stored procedures.  I
took a different tack and have basically set it up so all DDL and DML
(non-cursor operations and procedure/function calls) are dynamic like they
are now with DBISAM.  This will also allow for a smooth transition to other
non-SQL languages that don't have built-in SQL bindings.

I'm glad to say that the above is resolved, and I've simply got some
finishing touches to put on some of the above and it will be ready for beta.

BTW, the above is more for everyone's consumption, so I apologize for the
lengthy, and somewhat off-topic, response.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Tim


There are days I really wish I knew what you were talking about. Then I sit and reflect and realise I don't really care

Roy Lambert

"Tim Young [Elevate Software]" <timyoung@elevatesoft.com> wrote in message
news:D2920687-241A-4CFC-BDB2-D8A239C5FEE9@news.elevatesoft.com...
>
> BTW, the above is more for everyone's consumption, so I apologize for the
> lengthy, and somewhat off-topic, response.
>
>
I find nothing off-topic in that answer, the answer is much apriciated. So
the light in the tunnel was a train ?

Roy,

<< There are days I really wish I knew what you were talking about. >>

Actually, that was basically my point.  The whole exception handling
design in SQL/PSM is obtuse, confusing, and archaic.  I mean, the whole
point of having interpreted stored procedures in EDB vs. compiled stored
procedures in DBISAM is to make them more accessible without requiring the
recompile.  The SQL/PSM standard does not accomplish that with respect to
exception and cursor handling.  We want customers to easily understand and
adopt the stored procedures as an easy way of centralizing complex database
access that previously had to be done entirely in the client application.
This is especially true with EDB having more and more various front-ends,
such as ODBC, ADO.NET, and VCL.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com