At 12:24 PM 07-05-02 +0100, Mark Pawelek wrote:

>Postgres advantages over Firebird:
>
>1) There are several books on Postgres SQL, including three or four good
>ones. There isn't a single Firebird book and there were no Interbase
>books in any of the big London (UK) bookstores.

No, there are no third-party books on InterBase. There is a pair of
third-party e-books on Firebird, published by IBPhoenix, due out in final
draft this week on the IBPhoenix CD. PG have had six + years to get books
written and commercial sponsorship to encourage publishers to publish
them; Firebird has had less than two years and (so far) no
sponsorship...Firebird is doing OK for documentation, if you are willing to
make a bit of effort - have you ever visited the ibphoenix site?

>2) Postgres has a procedural programming language (like Oracle) in which
>SQL can be embedded. (I imagine that this would be a huge advantage -
>from my experience of moving ADO manipulated data to Stored Procedures
>in ASP.)

Firebird has two rather powerful procedural languages: one for compiling
code modules and triggers on the server, which includes the capability to
output a data set directly back to the client; the other which is coded
directly in a client application and precompiled - literally "embedded
SQL". Also, Firebird offers any number of positioned triggers in two
phases for each operation: BI, AI, BU, AU, BD, AD.

>3) Postgres has more traffic on public access newsgroups relating to
>"how to do" things. Is there a Firebird NNTP newsgroup? The Evil Empire
>wins flat out here though - w.r.t. the speed with which queries are
>addressed (but also w.r.t. the number of books they have (Oh yeh that
>Larry E is included with the Evil One, because he too has turned to the
>Dark-side).

Firebird has an active (some would say hyperactive) support forum at
ib-support, on this server. There is a specialised support/developer forum
for those doing Firebird and Java.

>Note I've only ever used MS SQL so I can only speak about
>Postgres/Interbase from what I've read. But I have looked at some of the
>Postgres books, 3 of which I rate as very good.

If you have only ever used MSSQL, how you must have missed your evenings
and weekends. Did you know that a Firebird server doesn't need a
babysitter? If it doesn't rely on a Windows server host, your FB server is
like oxygen or water supply - and it doesn't even care if you forget to
dust the console. If it does need to be on a Windows host, it's not going
to be your Firebird server that brings the system down every day.

>OK to complain about them (Postgres) knocking you - but as a
>minion/slave of the Evil Empire I suggest that a constructive alliance
>of Postgres and Firebird/Interbase would be mutually beneficial and
>would benefit any new users out there.

Why? Firebird has a large following, including several thousand people who
have been developing with its forerunner, InterBase, for up to 15 years
(one or two even longer <g>). About the Evil Empire (whatever it is) I
doubt if many of us give two hoots. It suits me to develop on Windows for
my customers who want Windows, or on Linux for those who want Linux, or on
both for those who know which side their bread is buttered on.

(And, actually, I fail to see any benefit to new Firebird users in learning
Postgres nor to new Postgres users in learning Firebird...)

Still, I'm not advocating that you should choose FB over PG on the basis of
what I say about it here - not on the basis of what others guess about it
elsewhere. The proof of a database is in trying it. The only realistic
next move for anyone considering a shift from MSSQL to an open source one
would be to load 'em and test 'em.

cheers,
Helen

All for Open and Open for All
Firebird Open SQL Database · http://firebirdsql.org ·
http://users.tpg.com.au/helebor/
_______________________________________________________