Re: Need input from Firebird users for a PostgreSQL vs Firebird comparison.

My bubble is not burst :-)

I am well aware of domains and user defined types.

The problem with using a domain is it's not out of the box support.
Someone new to the product is not going to come up with that.

As a new user coming to Firebird from some other database right now I
would be looking for a text or memo field as being built in, not
something that I need to create on my own, even if it is pretty easy.

CLOB is a huge improvement but we can't use that in the comparison
because it is not from a stable production version.

There is TONS of new and cool features I could add from the upcoming
PostgreSQL 8.3 but I wont do that because it's not a released version yet.

When Firebird 2.1 is released I will update the comparison showing CLOB
as the preferred way.

I have changed the text/memo field item for Firebird 2.0 to say Yes, but
it is yellow text to indicate a slight weirdness factor.


Darn, and I was trying so hard to burst it! <g>

I'm sorry but I think that your logic is a little bit flawed.

Can you honestly expect anyone to start using a RDBMS and not spend
even a little time getting to know the product and figuring out how to
use it to their advantage before trying to take it into a production
environment. While I understand your desire to highlight your
prefered database engine, I don't think your being fair in how your
presenting the facts.

Almost any development tool for Firebird/Interbase has the ability to
create and manipulate domains and thus use them in valid situations
for the specific engine. I would expect that any tool for PostgreSQL
would be the same and offer similar features.

While I think your correct with not wanting to use features from a
beta release, I do think that not accepting possible alternatives to
specific features, Domain typing to TEXT/MEMO for example, is slightly
misleading.

If your really serious about making this a "fair" comparitive chart,
then I would expect that it makes allowences for some alternative
solutions. I say this mostly because I don't think that while it's
not "out of the box support" it is still apart of the system, and as
such is still in the box so to speak.

Speaking of "Out of the box support" you mention on your chart the
Open Source Async Replication, that is a third-party tool is it not?
So can I include things such as ZeBeDee, which is a third-party tool
that can be used with firebird to provide a secure tunnel for
client/server communications? It's not SSL but it's still encrypted
and compressed tunneling!

There are two opensource replication systems listed on the IBPhoenix
web page.
(http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&s=1187849307:1094336&page=ibp_repl_tools)

There are at least two full text searching component sets for
Firebird, yes they are both commercial type entities.
(http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&s=1187849307:1094336&page=ibp_dev_comps)

There are a couple of database monitoring packages available as well.
(http://www.ibphoenix.com/main.nfs?a=ibphoenix&s=1187849307:1094336&page=ibp_misc_tools)

If your going to be comparing PostgreSQL to Firebird how about
comparing the easy of use for setup and administration.
With Firebird you install and go. Can you do that with PostgreSQL?

Does PostgreSQL have 64-bit support? FB does.

PostgreSQL will only run on NTFS under windows for certain features to
be enabled. Firebird has no such restrictions, everything is
available no matter what file system is in place.

Firebird has two different engine architectures, SuperServer and
Classic. Classic is similar to PostgreSQL in that a seperate instance
is launched for every connection. Superserver on the other hand is a
multi-threaded single process. Does PostgreSQL support this kind of
engine architecture?

As of FB2.0 there is a new back up utility called nbackup. It has
further features in that you can back up a live system with out
locking the database, it supports incremental backups (and restores if
I've understood it correctly). Thus utility also supports file system
backups (winzip, etc) with out shutting down the server.
(http://www.firebirdsql.org/manual/nbackup.html)

I hope that I've given you a couple of things to chew on for a while
<g>

Ryan.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: PostgreSQL or MySQL ?
    ... I'm not going to argue that PostgreSQL isn't superior technology, ... This is the case for MySQL now too. ... MySQL 5.0 supports these features in its ... so old that MySQL has discontinued support for them. ...
    (comp.databases)
  • Re: Interbase Turbo?
    ... and Firebird is a much better database. ... You obviously have not take a close look at PostgreSQL since version 7.3 or 7.4. ... PostgreSQL full temp table support. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Interbase Turbo?
    ... and Firebird is a much better database. ... PostgreSQL: Rich set of built in functions including ones for GIS. ... The database I used before Firebird didn't have them, ... And this is from the customers, support and the developers own mouth. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: why codegear dont support FIREBIRD ?
    ... for example Oracle has schemas and Firebird does ... I tried PostgreSQL for a project one time. ... There were other "features" I didn't like. ... The tools are inferior to IB Expert, which a Firebird user can use. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: More on Postgresql 8.1 beta
    ... but with PostgresDAC you get support and better feature support for Postgres. ... Postgresql has every imaginable function built in, with Firebird you have to resort to sometimes flakey UDFs ... Postgresql also has a better reputation as a Enterprise capable database in the corp IT circle. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.thirdpartytools.general)