Recent

Author Topic: Just curious -- why Firebird?  (Read 19954 times)

Troodon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
Just curious -- why Firebird?
« on: November 17, 2009, 08:10:39 pm »
Hi all,

No offense meant, I respect people's choices and this is just a question.

Many forum users seem to choose (or consider doing so) Firebird. I have been using MySQL and PostgreSQL (both open source) for years and I cannot help but wonder, why Firebird? While one could argue that the future of MySQL is uncertain given it's potential acquisition by Oracle, PostgreSQL is available under a BSD license and is a well established SQL RDBMS.

While I was writing an application for easily accessing MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Firebird using the same ZeosLib interface I noticed that: (1) there are differences between the Firebird protocol in successive minor releases; (2) there are differences between the SQL language used in Firebird vs. MySQL and PostgreSQL; and (3) regular expressions are unavailable in Firebird 2.1 (should be in 2.5). Bottom line, Firebird seems to be (still) under heavy development.

Why would you choose Firebird rather than MySQL or PostgreSQL for your Lazarus/FPC applications?

Any constructive response is greatly appreciated.
Lazarus/FPC on Linux

LacaK

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 600
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2009, 06:55:19 am »
Hi Troodon,

1.) AFAIK MySQL is not free for comercial use (you can not use MySQL if your program is not open sourced), Firebird is totaly free for commercial close-source usage.

2.) Firebird has very good SQL standard conformance and rich SQL language

3.) Firebird has little exe and can be used in embedded scenarios and can be easy bundled into custom setups

4.) Yes Firebird is under active developement, but this means, that more new functionality is added, this means that project is not dead. Latest release 2.1 is stable and very good.

Try it and I am sure you will love it ;-)

clauslack

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2009, 01:27:27 pm »
I agree with Lacak

I like the small footprint.
Look at this
http://www.firebirdnews.org/docs/fb2min.html

I like this history from Interbase (the Firebird antecesor) about Abram's tanks from
http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&page=ibp_paul_interview
I test this, power off server when insert 1000000 records, and database not was corrupted.
Here is an extract of the article
Quote
From Paul Beach
A number of years ago (and I am relying on memory here), InterBase signed a VAR contract with a company called Magnavox for the building of an advanced artillery fire and control system (AFTADS) for the US military. The system would consist of a central fire control that would instruct artillery (including tanks) to fire onto projected targets. InterBase was chosen to be the database for this system, because when a shell was fired the server managing the fire control system locally would crash. InterBase was the only database that Magnavox tested, that would recover automatically and come back on line in seconds. Whether this system was ever fully implemented I don't know. But as you say it makes a really good story.

Regards






tatamata

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 732
    • ZMSQL - SQL enhanced in-memory database
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2009, 02:46:37 pm »
The honest answer would be: Firebird has been historically related to Borland/Delphi community...Kind of tradition.
I think the only competitive advantage of Firebird versus PostgreSQL is possibility to make embedded database applications (for Windows only). There is no embedded PostgreSQL version. Otherwise, PostgreSQL is, in my opinion, better in every way.
But, I don't get it why people use MySQL...

Troodon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2009, 04:26:42 pm »
But, I don't get it why people use MySQL...

That's an easy one. In its early stages, MySQL was somewhat faster than PostgreSQL although it provided less features, and the license was permissive for Web developers who consequently adopted it on a large scale.
Lazarus/FPC on Linux

TurboRascal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 672
  • "Good sysadmin. Bad programmer."™
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2009, 05:04:46 pm »
I think tatamata gave the best answer to the question. Firebird descended from Interbase which was closely connected with Delphi since both were Borland's, so Delphi database developers are quite familiar with it.

There is also the embedded variant which is an advantage, yet I believe it is important only in one case. Namely, having a windows application which can be deployed standalone or as client-server as needed. On the other hand, it's not of importance if you need to deploy the standalone application on Linux.

If there is no need to switch between standalone and client-server, then I think sqlite might be enough for standalone and it's leaner than Firebird, and Postgres is a great, stable and featureful SQL server when one is needed.
Regards, ArNy the Turbo Rascal
-
"The secret is to give them what they need, not what they want." - Scotty, STTNG:Relics

gandergz

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2009, 09:49:27 pm »
1 - MySQL is not a full blooded RDBMS
2 - ProstgreSQL is very advanced, with a lot of features, but if you use some os them, you will be in trouble when porting your system to another RDBMS.
3 - Firebird is more conventional, compliant with established standards.

TurboRascal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 672
  • "Good sysadmin. Bad programmer."™
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2009, 01:19:11 am »
1 - MySQL is not a full blooded RDBMS
I agree ;)
2 - ProstgreSQL is very advanced, with a lot of features, but if you use some os them, you will be in trouble when porting your system to another RDBMS.
Why would anyone need to port from Postgres to anything? ;)
It's similar case as Oracle, people use and love the advanced features...
Regards, ArNy the Turbo Rascal
-
"The secret is to give them what they need, not what they want." - Scotty, STTNG:Relics

gandergz

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2009, 11:08:55 pm »
If your client already has MSSQL Server or Oracle or DB2, he/she probably will not agree with other.

TurboRascal

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 672
  • "Good sysadmin. Bad programmer."™
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #9 on: November 24, 2009, 11:37:31 am »
gandergz, do you mean I should be forced do use e.g. Oracle or (perish the thought) M$SQL just because they have it? :D
Even though I don't usually work with these RDBMSes... and my application is not made to work with them...?
Regards, ArNy the Turbo Rascal
-
"The secret is to give them what they need, not what they want." - Scotty, STTNG:Relics

marclebrun

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2009, 11:55:48 am »
I think, also, that we love Firebird because it's a "zero administration database:D
Though I don't know how that compares to others RDBMS...

gandergz

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 4
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #11 on: November 25, 2009, 09:45:46 pm »
To Turbo Rascal. No, of course, I don´t know the kind of job you do. I´ve been forced to work with several RDBMSes and migrate apps from one to another and I develop some sense of no comprimise with a specific tool. It´s possible to build projects with flexibility in mind. I dont´t believe in magic bullets.

fredycc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2009, 09:50:55 pm »
I prefer use Firebird for this reasons:

- I can Install in Windows or Linux without any problem.
- I deploy Udf's very easy to use it in the server.
- I compile udf's for windows or linux.(Lazarus)
- there is a clients for compact framework, i use it for some application with windows mobile.
- small footprint of course.

here some links very interesting about licensing for mysql:
http://www.somoslibres.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1056 (Spanish)

here 1 Tb Firebird database:
http://www.ibsurgeon.com/articles/item104 (English)

Zaher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 600
    • parmaja.com
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #13 on: December 12, 2009, 04:01:31 pm »
[quite]
- there is a clients for compact framework, i use it for some application with windows mobile.
[/quite]
Is that true? for
firebird 1.5
firebird 2.0

chrgra

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
Re: Just curious -- why Firebird?
« Reply #14 on: December 12, 2009, 07:44:38 pm »
In 2002 I made the decision to use firebird for a reason i did not see here.

-speed and relational.

-mysql was a litle faster but not relational.
-postgresql was relational but you could not get fire in it. (slooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........)

Regards
Chris Gradussen

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2018