Hi Jack (don't say this on an airliner),

It's starting to get a little attention. Postgres and MySQL were around as
open source dB's for a long time before Borland opened up Interbase. So,
they got a foothold in the open source community.

In this weeks "Information Week" magazine (the March 15, 2004 issue) on page
18, the "News Scan" page, in a highlighted box labeled "Industry Watch", a
small article cites a report from AMR Research that says open source
databases will be routinely used in mission critical applications by 2006.
It lists Firebird along with MySQL and Postgres.

Rick

----- Original Message -----

> Phil,
>
> >> Even though HSQL is often shipped as the default DB in products, I
> know of no one that either uses it, or recommends it for production
> use, just like nobody would recommend or use 'Access' in production
> for anything other than a trivial desktop app. <<
>
> Since my comments were the genesis of this thread, I thought I'd jump
> into it.
>
> I can't speak to relative merits of HSQL vs Firebird; however, my
> point wasn't about relative technical capabilities.
>
> I'm just perplexed why Firebird is so invisible to companies involved
> in web and application server hosting. I see plenty of MySQL,
> Hypersonic, and PostgreSQL citations, but hardly ever a mention of
> Firebird.
>
> BetaMax was by all measure technically superior to VHS, but in the end
> technical merits mattered less than market penetration. Technically,
> HSQL may be like Access in the world of DBMS's, but it seems to be
> more prevalent in the market (and mind) share than is Firebird.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>