 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm new to programming (trying Delphi 7.2 now, will try 2007 later on)
and quite a n00b on databases so if you're experienced I'd be grateful
if you could give me your input on this. Why Firebird? because I liked
Borland products, only tried Turbo Pascal and Delphi but in general they
served well to people and now reading the Interbase History
(http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/historical-reference/) I realized that
the original authors continue to develop the original source code, as
Firebird, and advice the community.
I also found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_relational_database_management_systems
and Firebird looks pretty decent. I don't understand much the database
terminology but I do the rest, so I think Firebird is OK. Any thoughts?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/10/2011 06:18, Saul Luizaga a écrit :
> I'm new to programming (trying Delphi 7.2 now, will try 2007 later on)
> and quite a n00b on databases so if you're experienced I'd be grateful
> if you could give me your input on this. Why Firebird? because I liked
> Borland products, only tried Turbo Pascal and Delphi but in general they
> served well to people and now reading the Interbase History
> (http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/historical-reference/) I realized that
> the original authors continue to develop the original source code, as
> Firebird, and advice the community.
>
> I also found this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_relational_database_management_systems
> and Firebird looks pretty decent. I don't understand much the database
> terminology but I do the rest, so I think Firebird is OK. Any thoughts?
Depend on what you intend to use a RDMS for.
For private/home use (where free is less expensive too), I usually
compare with MySql and Postgresql.
Mysql is easier, but restricted.
Postgresql is better, but you need to understand the various concepts
beyond RDMS to survive (and they are not explained for the noob in the
documentation).
Both have php-web interface (available separatly) which make them
somehow more friendly for the clickomaniacs.
For enterprise use, I have a very good recollection about Informix (but
you need the giant binders set of paper on the shelf near you, as error
were mainly reported as digits, and the binders give you the text
plain), and despite industry standard, a not so good about Oracle DB.
But it's something with more than 10 years. Things might have changed.
One bad point for Firebird, from the wiki page: the max row size is
limited to 65KB. you cannot store raw data (like image blob) in it. Or
you need special care (such as Large object/blob...).
The Date range (100 - 32768) is also a bit strange.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thx for the reply :) I'm just learning and making university projects
for my classes so I don't think I'll be needing 64K rows :D, quite less
I assume.
I forgot to mention that I use Windows (7 64-bits).
For what I read InterBase was very powerful and advanced and made with
lots of love :) and since the same people and other passionate
contributors are developing Firebird from Open Source InterBase I though
that was the way to go, besides I have been advised that many InterBase
applications where written in Delphi and that many InterBase developers
switched to Firebird.
I wanted to know the what other people thought about it and what they
compared to; for what I read is quite a complete and powerful plus easy
to use and learn database manager but I wanted other opinions and POVs,
thx for yours again :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/10/10 04:08, Le_Forgeron a écrit :
> The Date range (100 - 32768) is also a bit strange.
100 - 2^15 (maxint+1 on 16 bits)
It's enough to cary you 3 quarter through the 33th millenia... :P
The -32768 to 99 (33th millenia BC to almost the end of the first
century) is not considered usefull and may have been arbitraly removed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thx mate, I'll keep that in mind :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/10/2011 09:08 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Depend on what you intend to use a RDMS for.
This.
No, really. Everything else flows from this.
> For private/home use (where free is less expensive too), I usually
> compare with MySql and Postgresql.
Last time I looked at MySQL, it had almost no features at all. I mean,
even trivial stuff like sub-selects wasn't implemented. By default it
doesn't support transactions (!), unless you specially configure it to
do so. It seemed like a cheap toy.
Then again, if you're only trying to store your CD collection, then
sure, MySQL can handle that just fine.
I looked into PostgreSQL. I don't think I ever got around to actually
using it though. It seemed reasonable.
On Windows there's Jet. (Although you might possibly need Microsoft
Access installed to make use of it. I'm not sure.)
> For enterprise use, I have a very good recollection about Informix,
> and despite industry standard, a not so good about Oracle DB.
For some reason, it's very fashionable to hate Oracle. Personally, it's
the DB I'm most familiar with, and the one I like the best. I understand
it's a free download now, and you can use it for NON-COMMERCIAL purposes
completely free of charge.
I strongly recommend that you DO NOT do this.
Oracle is great if you need enterprise-grade functionality. It's
massively overkill for home use. Because of all the advanced features,
it's very complicated to set up. (One of the main reasons people hate it
so much is the unfriendly interface.)
Nobody sets up a 200-node data center with load balancing and
hot-failover just for their home stuff. Similarly, nobody should
consider using Oracle DB for home projects. (Unless that project is to
actually learn Oracle for when somebody pays you to use it.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If the answer was for me thanks. As I wrote is only for learning and
using in University class projects, nothing massive like a CD collection
just mare electronics circuits data from computer ports and PICs,
probably some text too, really small data set.
I worked as a support technician in a cooperative and I had to install
Oracle as a routine when a we had to make a clean Windows Install (XP at
that time) and yes, it was big and when a developer added a feature, it
was a pain to actually have it to work, even the developer had to modify
the configuration/connection files several times and I think made an
ODBC config in Control Panel and sometimes "the ghost in the machine"
wouldn't let it work, even when everything was well configured, the
developer had to personally assist the user along with me and make
network functionality diags, reinstallations... well a nightmare and I
got delayed to attend other users that needed me and my monthly
attention rate dropped and I looked like I was scratching my belly half
the freaking time, yes, fortunately no Oracle representative was around
or I'd punch his nose on sight, well no really, because they do had
meeting with the software engineering team and I saw them, but it was
the piece of software I didn't want to install if I could avoid it and I
didn't understood why they could make it friendlier, why not hire a
small team of developers just to do that, after all it was a $us 1
Million a year that Cooperative payed to get the product and full
support, the network user base was 500 but the Oracle's was about 300,
the self developed product was SIGECOM IIRC.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I meant Oracle should hire the developers to make their database
management system friendlier, if a third world Country can pay lots of
money I imagine they receive more from first world Countries and they
have more than enough money to do so, but I guess support wouldn't sell
so well... nice ethics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
