Hi,

>> >> >Do we really need it, probably not, here is a semi-related
>> >> >question
>> >>
>> >> There's a difference between _really_ needing something (as in: at
>> >> this very moment) and needing it. Perhaps you and I don't need it,
>> >> but other engines are supporting a wide range of data- types. Take,
>> >> for example, a native GUID, Boolean, Bit etc in account and it all
>> >> stacks up. Every new datatype is a new feature.
>> >
>> >And comes with a fresh new set of problems, such as bugs, and
>> >the fact that it makes the engine that much larger.
>>
>> Every new feature or bugfix has the risc of creating new bugs. That's
>> probably what makes programming so hard ;)
>>
>> As for the size, currently, InterBase/Firebird isn't just 'small',
>> it's extremely small and I wouldn't give a sh*t if it would grow to
>> 10Mb even for embedded applications. Is size (not for downloads or
>> network traffic) still a problem these days?
>>
>
>You want big, I calculated at one time, to download Oracle would
>take 3 days at 45Kbps. Your right, the engine could probably
>afford to grow a bit, however lets not go the other way, and make it
>bigger just for the sake of making it bigger. I ran it on a server

True - true. Btw, Oracle has a bit mre installed, same goes for DB2,
or any other of the big boys... The GUI tools, complete Java virtual
machine implementations, their own file systems (Oracle, for example,
can run on a non-partitioned HD), and LOTS of documentation in
HTML (which is not exactly the smallest format :)), replication,
one or more ODBC drivers, connectors to other databases and so
on and so on... we don't reach that amount of stuff for a
loooooooooooong time.


Ah well - let's enjoy New Year first - see ya!

Martijn Tonies
InterBase Workbench - the developer tool for InterBase and Firebird
http://www.interbaseworkbench.com

Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com

"This is an object-oriented system.
If we change anything, the users object."