Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 19th Jul 2004 18:04 UTC, submitted by mariuz
Databases The Firebird Project announces the release of Firebird V1.5.1. this relese represents a committment by the project to develop and deliver ongoing improvements to this popular open source database engine.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: nasty? (and ignorant)
by wh0ever on Tue 20th Jul 2004 01:49 UTC

I agree with "Postgres".
The keepers of the public Interbase release have some issues to handle.
If you have any issues about perfomance (like select count(*) from somewhere (full table scan in fb), or similar); the answer you get from the forums is; "add more hardware" or "knowing the number of records violates with the relational model...".

Fancy words -- propably rigth thing to assume(kinda) -- but, as a systems developer; I don't accept answers like that!
Don't tell me to add with hardware; IBM does it all the time!

The license, which on, FB is relesed, is great (I still tell my customers to install it), nevertheless; I will let FB go when PostgreSQL has a stable, native, win32 port (7.5 + 7.5.1?).

It is really too sad that the FB gang got their elitists bragging about that FB is a "non DBA database server" -- and at the same time telling us that "you cannot change the meta-data unless you have "single connect to the database" (non DBA?)
Do you have a lot of changes to your fb-database? Back-up and restore your database every night (non DBA?).

You have no choise of where-ever you store your data, where youre indexes are located or what kind of index you want (want bitmap-indexes? no way!).
I guess this used to be ok, but no more.
I'll stick to use FB (still; I like the license) for small databases like a couple of hundred GB and a couple of dozen tables. But for more serious business; I'll wait for PostgreSQL to support the platforms I need.

It's really too bad that only a handful of individuals stops a great dbms to evolve.

Besides that; Borland released the code for Interbase (the sources that FB is trying to evolve from) in 2000 (or was it 1999?), and they semm to try to let the platform to evolve.

My guess for my customers in the future is (need a multiplatform dbms with perfomance and acid support) that; until PostgreSQL is available for my Win32 customers; I'll keep up with FB. When the indexing gets important (believe me; it will sooner than you think) in larger projects I'll have to wait to test PostgreSQL or stick to Oracle, MSSQL or what ever.

Before you decide to use FB; Take a look at the FB-support/dev forums; you'll be suprised of how they ignore the way SQL actually is being used in real life. If you have a question suggesting that "Oracle, MSSQL, MySQL, PostreSQL, DB2, Gupta and what ever" handles indexing or what ever in a similar, reliable sort of way the answer you'll get is; "Won't do that!".

There used to be a fork of the public Interbase sources (don't remember the name...). I guess that the fork existed just because changes where impossible unless you were from the "core team". The problem -- today -- is that the fork merged into FB (giving the forkers a membership in the "core team").

The best thing for the old Interbase-sources must be that somebody creates a branch from FB 1.5.1, or maybe the 2.0 head-branch, and continue from there....