This thread got me thinking. In today's "$69/gig" world, what advantage does
Firebird's small footprint continue to offer?

Answer: In Free VMWare Server Virtual machines.

Currently, a search for web hosting services that provide Firebird doesn't
return many hits. Well, that's not true- google returns "about 167,000" of
them, but not many of them are actually web hosting services that provide
firebird! But the same search using "MySQL" instead of Firebird returns 2.97
million- quite a few more. <g>

Anyway, the point is that IF Firebird's memory usage is a lot smaller than
MySQL's, then it might have a big advantage in this environment. Only
problem is, I can't find any hard data to confirm that assertion. I see
stats like "1/5 the memory footprint of MySQL" (Bill Todd's Interbase Vs.
MySQL white paper), but no actual numbers.

Does anyone with experience with both FB and MySQL in a web server
environment have any hard data on comparative memory requirements?

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
>[mailto:Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Claus Heeg
>Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 05:49 PM
>To: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: RE: [Firebird-general] Confused,I feel
>
>
>
>Well I see it the same way.
>there will be a dog-fight coming up among all DB FB IB MYSQL
>etc. and commercials ORACLE DB2 M§SQL.
>Unfortunately two wild-dogs have now a linkage.
>MySQL will be armed with Jim's outstanding skill putting
>transactional features and FB goodies in there. And for FB
>even worse it will be done netfrastruture-way: in memory while
>FB is bound to slow disk! When FB is a nice Bird - mysql will
>be an Killer-Eagle ready to
>blow away all others. I am sure that MYsql will be a killer DB!
>
>-claus-
>---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
>From: "Steve Summers" <sesummers@...>
>Reply-To: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:06:30 -0500
>
>>Pavel Cisar Wrote:
>>
>>Firebird and MySQL going after different spots? Don't get fooled. We
>>compete, big time. This "message" should just easy some
>troubled minds,
>>and if it really means anything, then that we don't want to see the
>>other side destroyed and wiped out from the market (well,
>mostly). Call
>>it "friendly competition" or whatever, but we definitely race for the
>>market share. For MySQL it means more money, for FB project it
>>translates into more resources for development and of course
>money for
>>businesses built on top of FB.
>>
>>I think to the degree that there's any truth to the "we don't really
>>compete" line, it's that MySQL is more targeted at the "web
>application
>>back end" market, while Firebird is more targeted (and
>appropriate for)
>>more traditional client/server apps, where FB's excellent stored
>>procedures and triggers, transaction support, ease of deployment, and
>>simple administration are more valuable than MySQL's raw speed (on
>>non-transactional tables) and text searching functionality.
>>
>>Fortunately, there is plenty of un-penetrated market for BOTH
>products,
>>that is currently occupied by products with far inferior
>"bang for the
>>buck" ratios.
>>
>>
>>
>>Community email addresses:
>> Post message: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
>> Subscribe: Firebird-general-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>> Unsubscribe: Firebird-general-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>> List owner: Firebird-general-owner@yahoogroups.com
>>
>>Shortcut URL to this page:
>> http://www.yahoogroups.com/community/Firebird-general
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Community email addresses:
> Post message: Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe: Firebird-general-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: Firebird-general-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> List owner: Firebird-general-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
>Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://www.yahoogroups.com/community/Firebird-general
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>