Selecting a mid-market database

The mid-market is hot. It is forecasted to be the main growth segment in the IT market for the next few
years. As such, it is fiercely contested by the major software makers. The BBC recently even called it a 60 billion dollar software battle. What exactly constitutes the mid-market is a bit vague, but some define it as businesses ranging from 50 to 1,000 employees.“These businesses no longer look to IT only for basic business operation, but for managing customer,
partner, and supplier relationships; for improving business execution in the
office and in the field; and for better understanding their businesses. These
activities generally involve the use of databases, and the ability to set up,
maintain, and use those databases is becoming key to making the most of one’s
IT investment”, says market researcher IDC. Mid-market businesses have different requirements from the large Fortune-500 businesses. IDC identified the
following mid-market specific requirements:

  • Ease of use. Database administrators (DBA’s) are in short supply, and getting more expensive
    all the time. Mid-market businesses generally can’t afford to keep a staff
    of DBA’s and expect the database to be easy to
    configure and fairly self-managing, requiring little or no in-house
    database administration expertise.
  • Efficiency. Mid-market businesses are cost-sensitive
    and seek to avoid unnecessary expense in either systems or storage. For
    this reason, the favored database is the one that requires the least CPU
    and storage resources to do the job.>
  • Full functionality. As mid-market businesses
    integrate with the larger world and as they become more dependent on IT
    for their operations, they have many of the same needs as other businesses
    for full SQL support, stored procedures and triggers, transaction support,
    security, and so on.
  • Support from leading applications. Most, if not all,
    software used in mid-market IT environments will be packaged software. The
    database chosen must be supported by that software.

Many databases are available for the mid-market, but only five have an installed base of 1 million
or more and have made a commitment to the mid-market user: Oracle’s Standard Edition 1
(“SE1”), IBM’s DB2 Express
, Microsoft’s SQL Server
and two open-source products, MySQL-5 and Firebird. Installed base is of course not relevant as a feature of the software product itself, but it is important as a measure of how real people have made real-world choices, based on features and cost. Systems that have a large installed base must have a cost/feature proposition that works really well for many people. As far as I can fathom, only 5 database systems have such a proposition.

So how do the “Big 5” stack up to IDC’s set of requirements? One way to find out
is to delve your way through a big stack of whitepapers and doing a feature by
feature comparison. I have chosen a different approach. Of those 5, four are very well-known and one is a lot lesser known. It must have succeeded on other attributes than marketing hoopla. What better way to find out more about the the trade-offs involved and the ‘must have’ features then asking the people who chose that particular system, Firebird?

FrontRange Solutions is a leading provider of CRM and Service Management solutions for
small and mid-market businesses. It also is one of Microsoft’s largest resellers:
their highly successful GoldMine CRM solution is used
at over 30,000 businesses, serving over 1.3 million users every day. Last
month, FrontRange announced that the next
GoldMine release would use the Firebird database. The
technical product manager for GoldMine, Angel Alexander Magana, says: “We considered other popular open source options
such as MySQL, PostgreSQL and more recently, Ingres. Firebird came out on top
based on a combination of factors including licensing, install process,
performance, administration, feature set, and
cross-platform capabilities. We also feel that MySQL,
PostgreSQL and Ingres would
need to be handled differently due to technical reasons, licensing and other

Magana continues:

“Something that was equally important to us, and many would likely
consider irrelevant, is the Firebird footprint. Many people would argue against
that being a factor given that we live in a world where 1 GB of disk space can
be had for less than a dollar. However, many of our customers rely on being
able to upgrade or purchase their copy of GoldMine
via the Internet. When you look at it through their eyes, increasing the size
of our installer by any significant factor means longer download times, which
equates to an increased amount of time away from one’s primary work
responsibilities. That is a real issue for us, as we do not wish to impact our
users in that manner. Other possible database alternatives would have
significantly increased the size of our installer, in some cases, by a
magnitude of almost 200%. One of the main principles of GoldMine
is to provide tools that help one be more productive. Asking someone to wait
online while a 130 MB installer downloads would start you off on the wrong foot
and is contradictory to the productivity philosophy.”

As is common with open
source projects, there have been fierce debates in internet newsgroups about
which open source database is “the best”. Magana has a different
view: “In my opinion, I feel the discussion of Firebird vs. MSDE (or other
commercial alternatives) is of greater importance than the discussion to
differentiate Firebird from other open source database systems like MySQL or PostgreSQL.”
Paul Ruizendaal, CEO of Firebird distributor Janus Software
agrees: “When we win business versus SQL Server, we usually win it on
product quality. Recently, the director of SQL Server product management at
Microsoft, Tom Rizzo, stated that their product was built like a sausage,
and that you did not want to see how it was made. With open source, you do see
how it is made and the resulting quality shows through in the user

About one-third of mid-market businesses in Europe already use
open source databases, compared to 25% using Linux, according to
. An example is Austrian call-center business Clientel
Telephone Marketing
. “Firebird is at the heart of our Clientel Suite software”, says the company’s CTO Gerhard
Knapp, “We started years ago with Interbase 4.0, and
use now Firebird 1.5.1 SuperServer. For Web-access
via PHP we have installed a Linux web server with Firebird. Nearly 200 users
with high concurrent updates are using Firebird on seven servers, with 21 1-2
GB databases. A typical database has more than 1000 tables, 70 stored
procedures, and lots of generators, and some tables have more then 1 million
records. We also use Firebird for our own database driven registry, internal
mail-system, in a workflow integrated mailing server (fax, email, print), in
our ticket-system, in our MS Word document storage, and in a PHP driven picture
webpage system, which is directly streaming stored blob pictures to the
customer browser. Our latest tool is Datamatch, which
uses Firebird to provide German optimized homonym and fuzzy logic matching.”

Why did Clientel decide to use Firebird? It turns out that there are
many reasons behind the decision. Knapp says: “Firebird is very functional,
fast and secure. It is also easy to install and maintain, and is
straightforward to understand. Backup and restore are easy and fast.” Knapp
agrees with Magana that size matters: “Firebird doesn’t need 100 MB and more of
files to make it work.” The business friendly license and the availability on
many platforms are important too: “Our customers have not to pay for database
licenses, which is an advantage for our business and allows for a fast return
of investment for our customers. We can use other operating systems, not only
Windows, if we need it.” And in the end, quality is what matters most: “We now
have a lot of experience (7+ years) with the Firebird code base and we trust
this database engine. As software developers we enjoy it.”

Firebird’s oracle-mode opens an interesting angle on application support. Take the example of Compiere. Compiere is an open-source ERP/CRM package for the
mid-market. With hundreds of thousands of downloads and hundreds of
installations in production use, it is the most popular open source application
of its kind. It was designed to run on Oracle, but Firebird supports Compiere through its oracle-mode emulation
. Compiere user Ivan Biddles
says: “I think Firebird is a great piece of work. I downloaded the demo,
followed the instructions in the how-to and had Compiere
up and running on Firebird in a matter of minutes.” Ruizendaal adds: “Oracle
SE1 is a direct competitor to Firebird. They currently scale better on the very
high end and we scale better on the low end, but for 80% of users the products
totally overlap. Firebird however has a clear advantage when it comes to ease
of use and cost of use.”

And how about MySQL? Ruizendaal grins: ” MySQL has a formidable marketing machine behind it, really
quite impressive. The market would seriously shake if we could combine their
marketing power with Firebird’s quality, performance and 20 year track

If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.


  1. 2005-05-03 9:52 pm
  2. 2005-05-03 10:06 pm
  3. 2005-05-03 10:06 pm
  4. 2005-05-03 10:21 pm
  5. 2005-05-03 10:27 pm
  6. 2005-05-03 10:30 pm
  7. 2005-05-03 10:40 pm
  8. 2005-05-03 10:47 pm
  9. 2005-05-03 10:49 pm
  10. 2005-05-03 10:54 pm
  11. 2005-05-03 11:42 pm
  12. 2005-05-04 2:45 am
  13. 2005-05-04 2:49 am
  14. 2005-05-04 3:14 am
  15. 2005-05-04 3:43 am
  16. 2005-05-04 4:20 am
  17. 2005-05-04 4:42 am
  18. 2005-05-04 4:49 am
  19. 2005-05-04 4:50 am
  20. 2005-05-04 9:02 am
  21. 2005-05-04 9:30 am
  22. 2005-05-04 10:02 am
  23. 2005-05-04 10:07 am
  24. 2005-05-04 10:31 am
  25. 2005-05-04 11:09 am
  26. 2005-05-04 11:35 am
  27. 2005-05-04 1:12 pm
  28. 2005-05-04 1:24 pm
  29. 2005-05-04 1:55 pm
  30. 2005-05-04 3:37 pm
  31. 2005-05-04 3:44 pm
  32. 2005-05-04 5:32 pm
  33. 2005-05-04 6:23 pm
  34. 2005-05-04 6:41 pm
  35. 2005-05-04 6:57 pm
  36. 2005-05-04 7:22 pm
  37. 2005-05-04 9:34 pm
  38. 2005-05-04 10:33 pm
  39. 2005-05-04 11:21 pm
  40. 2005-05-05 5:44 am
  41. 2005-05-05 8:09 am
  42. 2005-05-05 10:58 am
  43. 2005-05-05 12:36 pm
  44. 2005-05-05 3:39 pm
  45. 2005-05-05 4:23 pm
  46. 2005-05-05 4:43 pm
  47. 2005-05-05 4:51 pm
  48. 2005-05-05 5:11 pm
  49. 2005-05-05 5:16 pm
  50. 2005-05-05 8:47 pm
  51. 2005-05-05 11:43 pm
  52. 2005-05-06 3:21 am