On 10 Jun 2002 at 11:00, Todd Brasseur wrote:

> Agreed,
>
> When dealing with an Open Source database (virtually free) we can't
> expect everything right now. We either have to put in the work to add
> it (which I don't have the time or ability to do) or wait or move to a
> different database that has more capabilities.
>
> Ever since building our application we have struggled with our choice
> of database. We love Firebird. It does most everything we need and
> what it can't do we have built work arounds. Our problem is that when
> we go to sell our application, everyone wants SQL Server or Oracle.
> Some of our current clients love our application but their IT people
> want us to change to SQL Server. We have many small clients who don't
> care about the database and don't want to have to pay for a database.
> They only pay a couple of thousand dollars a year in support. They
> don't want to pay another thousand for a database. What to do ...
> what to do ....?????

This isn't really the problem, the problem is the client probably hired someone with
SQL Server certification, and that person doesn't know anything else.

There are two solutions to this "problem", first, is black-box the server, offer the
client a light-weight machine running Linux and Firebird to support YOUR app, it
just needs 1 or 2u in their server stack, and their staff can ignore it. Other then
running the occassional install from a remote.

Second, you had a reason to pick Firebird, so tell them about it, the fact it's light
weight, has better support for SP's and Views, and needs almost no maintenance,
other then backups and the occasional restore. The fact it runs on multiple
platforms, etc.

You eventually end up with a bigger problem, do you really want to make existing
good clients go out and drop 15 large on SQL Server? Add it up, at least $5,000 on
a new server, Windows 2000 licences, SQL Server licences, time and energy to set
it all up, and retrain staff etc. Or do you want to try and maintain 2 versions of the
same program, that are virtually the same but vastly different.

> Right now I think eventually we will have to change to SQL Server.
> I'm sure not looking forward to re-writing the database included 120
> tables, four hundred stored procedures and many many triggers.

Now, who is going to pay for all that labour? SQL Server is the flavour of the
month, will Windows and SQL Server make the switch to 64bit quickly and easily, or
will it be like to switch from 16 bit to 32 bit, they sort of hack at it until it almost not
quite works, sort of.




Paul Schmidt, President
Tricat Technologies
paul@...
www.tricattechnologies.com