[fpc-other] Firebird vs PostgreSQL

[Santiago A.]

Hello:

In my old Delphi days I worked with interbase and later with firebird.
(Now MySQL and MsSQLserver, life is hard)

I have some complains, but the overall feeling about Firebird is very
positive. It is a handy and powerful enough for almost everything . In
fact, I still have some production server running with no problems for
years.

I have tried a little PostgreSQL, it looks powerful and has good reviews
and has features that firebird hasn't, some of them very interesting
like replication. Nevertheless, I've heard that windows is not its
natural habitat. On the other hand, Firebrid looks very handy for pet
projects (and not so pet)

Any opinion? what do you use?.

Com'on  troll and flame a little ;-)

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Post by Santiago A.
I have some complains, but the overall feeling about Firebird is very
positive. It is a handy and powerful enough for almost everything . In
fact, I still have some production server running with no problems for
years.

I've used Firebird for the last 10 years in various companies. Databases
ranged from 100's of MBytes to multi TeraByte databases. The latter
contains lots of data, not necessarily tons of binary blob data.
Firebird performed brilliantly throughout the various projects I used it
in. I simply can't fault the database server. The fact that it is so
easy to install, maintain, backup and even use in read-only or embedded
environments is a massive plus point.

Oh, and I've access Firebird from Free Pascal, Delphi and Java based
projects - all with equal ease.

Post by Santiago A.
I have tried a little PostgreSQL, it looks powerful and has good reviews
and has features that firebird hasn't, some of them very interesting
like replication.

I have heard good things about PostgreSQL too, and once installed it
under Linux, but never really used it. I did do a couple of speed tests
(that could run under various RDBMS's) and PostgreSQL did not perform
very well out-of-the-box. Apparently you need to tweak it first before
it performs decently. But this was some 6 years ago, so I don't know if
things have improved since. I do know PostgreSQL does have some
Enterprise style features like replication - not sure if there is
anything else included too.

Post by Santiago A.
Nevertheless, I've heard that windows is not its
natural habitat.

I have heard the same, but never tried PostgreSQL under Windows. I have
run Firebird under Windows, Linux and FreeBSD with great results.

Apparently Embarcadero's Interbase database is pretty terrible - I've
only heard bad things about it. And no Firebird and Interbase don't have
common code any more. Firebird was totally rewritten pretty soon after
the original Interbase code was released. Yet the network protocol and
API's was kept the same for compatibility. Speaking of network
protocols. Apparently the latest Firebird has a very much improved
protocol that gives a much higher network throughput - I personally
haven't tested it yet.

Comparing Firebird to MySQL.... All I can say is I really don't know why
Firebird isn't more popular - it is brilliant. MySQL on the other hand
is absolutely ridiculous!!! I explained all my reasons many times before
in the Lazarus Forums (eg: One simply example is MySQL's reliance on the
file system it is installed on and that can (and does) determine if the
database table names are case sensitive or not. So don't ever move from
a Windows MySQL install to a Linux MySQL install - you'll shouldn't be
surprised if your applications stop working).

Anyway, I also like the fact that Firebird databases are really compact
compared to SQL-Server or PostgreSQL databases which contain the exact
same structure and data. Some will argue the opposite fact though.

Regards,
Graeme


_______________________________________________
fpc-other maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/lis

[Santiago A.]

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys

Post by Santiago A.
I have some complains, but the overall feeling about Firebird is very
positive. It is a handy and powerful enough for almost everything . In
fact, I still have some production server running with no problems for
years.

I've used Firebird for the last 10 years in various companies.
Databases ranged from 100's of MBytes to multi TeraByte databases.

Well, I never reached that point. My databases were from 100 Mb to less
than 2 Gb.

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys
Comparing Firebird to MySQL.... All I can say is I really don't know
why Firebird isn't more popular

That's my point. Why Firebird is not more popular?

Once I read two point about Firebird lack of popularity:
* In early days, firebird documentation was almost inexistent, there
were a few .txt with new features but you had to rely on Interbase 6.0
docs, that weren't very good either. So it looked like an almost
abandoned software maintained by a few fans.
* It had no administration tool, you had (and you still have) to rely on
third part tools. I think flamerobin is the administration tool "de facto"

PostgreSQL is more complete, but more complex as well. Nevertheless I
think Firebird does what 99% non-big-enterprise projects need, and works
perfectly in windows, Linux and other unices.
First time I heard about postgreSQL, it looked more a laboratory
test-tool to experiment with new academic advanced features than a
production RDBM. Compared to Firebird, Firebird looked more robust and
more aimed to real world.
Since then, postgreSQL has become the new darling RDBM in opensource 
world. I was wondering if firebird has some evident drawback , that I
can't see. or it is years behind PostgresSQL.
Am I missing important things?

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys
MySQL on the other hand is absolutely ridiculous!!!

MySQL was a low fingerprint for web servers. It even hadn't
transactions. When it appeared it was almost the only one.
Since then it has evolved to a more complete RDBM, but...

[Marco van de Voort]

Post by Santiago A.
That's my point. Why Firebird is not more popular?
* In early days, firebird documentation was almost inexistent, there
were a few .txt with new features but you had to rely on Interbase 6.0
docs, that weren't very good either. So it looked like an almost
abandoned software maintained by a few fans.
* It had no administration tool, you had (and you still have) to rely on
third part tools. I think flamerobin is the administration tool "de facto"

* it was x86 only for a long time.

Which is why I ended up with postgresql, having powerpc and later arm
servers.
_______________________________________________
fpc-other maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists

[Santiago A.]

Provided that you're not getting into things like creating new users
on the fly, the SQL dialects are sufficiently similar that a client
program can talk to either without substantial modification. I think
that a reasonable approach is to select Postgres for departmental or
larger storage, or Firebird for something that's strictly local.

Why Postgres is better for "departmental or larger storage"? What has
Postgres that Firebird hasn't?

I have some complains about firebird.

i.e. Can't alter views, they must be deleted an recreated.

I had made backups that couldn't be restored  because wrong data.  I
don't know it happened, maybe a change in constraints that didn't check
former valid data, but with new constraint invalid. But the overall is
that It allowed in some point invalid data, to  backup it, but not to
restore it.

But that was versions ago, I've heard it those problems where solved.

So, again, what has Postgres that Firebird hasn't? I have worked with
firebird a lot, but not with Postgres, it will be interesting a review
of someone who has worked with both.

PS: Sorry Mark, I replied to you, not to the group. ;-)

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Post by Santiago A.
Why Postgres is better for "departmental or larger storage"? What has
Postgres that Firebird hasn't?

Exactly. In my years of using Firebird, I think it is a perfect fit for
small and large environments.



Regards,
Graeme

_______________________________________________
fpc-other maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

I think that a
reasonable approach is to select Postgres for departmental or larger
storage, or Firebird for something that's strictly local.

Once again... why must Firebird always be reduced to the “only for
smaller database needs” environments?

That is exactly the point I was trying to make with my earlier reply.
I’ve used Firebird in very busy production (Enterprise) environments
with large amounts of users hitting the database server, and with large
sets of data stored. Firebird performed fantastically well. So I really
don’t see the need to reduce Firebird to only “smallish” environments.
Firebird is a very well rounded database server, and the latest version
introduces so very welcomed new features.

What Firebird is lacking is a really good "management studio" style
application. FlameRobin is currently filling that space, but I
definitely see space for improvement (tracing and profiling, some graphs
explaining the results, graphical execution plans of queries etc). Maybe
this is a good business opportunely for somebody to venture into.

Regards,
Graeme

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

I've suggested that different servers
have different areas of applicability,

I better mention that I replied before I saw your list of reasons for
using PostgreSQL. Apologies if I upset you. Chill please - no "holly
war" was intended.

Regards,
Graeme

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

One of the (numerous) things I'm wrestling with at the moment is
PostgreSQL replication...

Speaking of PostgreSQL, I just realised that tiOPF’s 3-hourly unit test
runs don’t include tests against PostgreSQL. I’m busy setting that up now.

This morning I read through some PostgreSQL documentation, and some of
the SQL syntax is pretty nice. I do curse the fact that they too (like
Microsoft SQL Server) supports XML field types. I so *hate* the usage of
that at work. In two companies I’ve now seen the XML field types being
used as the “lets dump everything in there because we are too fucken
lazy to implement real database design”. It is so hard to find
information when they are hidden in XML fields, and also makes SQL
queries 10x harder. Obviously it also means your application is not
portable to other relation database servers. Vendor lock-in yet again! I
curse the person that came up with the XML field data type concept!!

Regards,
Graeme

[geneb]

rubbish any of them. Now I'm sorry if I've startled one of your holy
cows, but right now I've got my own problems and I don't see spending

*rofl* I'm going to file that right next to "sacred cow tipping". :D

g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
_______________________________________________
fpc-other maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://

[gabor]

I think you should ask the question "which database is best for my
project". The selection of database should depend on the assumptions and
requirements of your project. For some projects you only need SQLite.
But for another project you will need Oracle. And in another you will be
doomed to what your customer already has.

Post by Santiago A.
In my old Delphi days I worked with interbase and later with firebird.
(Now MySQL and MsSQLserver, life is hard)
I have some complains, but the overall feeling about Firebird is very
positive. It is a handy and powerful enough for almost everything . In
fact, I still have some production server running with no problems for
years.
I have tried a little PostgreSQL, it looks powerful and has good reviews
and has features that firebird hasn't, some of them very interesting
like replication. Nevertheless, I've heard that windows is not its
natural habitat. On the other hand, Firebrid looks very handy for pet
projects (and not so pet)
Any opinion? what do you use?.
Com'on  troll and flame a little ;-)

_______________________________________________
fpc-other maillist - fpc-***@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.fre