Helen Borrie wrote:

>>So far the ff seem to be the case:
>>
>>Footprint: Firebird is much(?) smaller than PostgreSQL
>>while providing a feature set that closely matches it.
>
> True; and it's more the case that PG developers have been working hard
> over the past two years to try and mimic IB/Fb features.

Interesting, which IB/FB features would these be? I was
always under the impression that PostgreSQL had slightly
more advanced features. Though I have yet to figure out
what these features would be since I am a more or less
an introductory user of SQL RDBSMes, having had only a
cursory introduction to stuff like transactions, triggers,
etc..., after moving to Firebird from MySQL.

> Firebird has official RPM installations that I have never known to fail. I
> certainly never had to modify any scripts or set up the rc files or
> symlinks. There might be more work to do on a Linux that doesn't support
> RPMs though...I consider this to be more a problem for a newbie to
> Linux.

Yes, I was using the tarball under Slackware 8.1 and had
to setup the init scripts manually. The install script
was bugging out at a certain point. But Firebird invocation
looks straightforward enough that I just ignored what
the install script tried to do after it had untarred
all the files.

>>Win/Linux/*nix interoperability:
>>As far as I can tell, Firebird wins this hands down.
>
>
> Yea, as to the manner born. Gbak -t on one platform, restore on
> another. Log in and carry on.

I tried copying a .gdb straight between Windows and Linux
(shutting down the server first) and it worked. Is there
something to recommend against using this approach?

> Can't comment. Choice of tools is usually pretty subjective. My personal
> preference is for tools that ride close to the API and to script all
> metadata manipulation; others crave tools like Access' query
> builder. With PG having had Linux OS all to itself for many years, I too
> would expect its tools selection to be pretty reasonable.

I'm trying out kinterbasdb right now and what I see I like.
Everything looks Pythonic so far.

>>I think a Firebird vs. PostgreSQL is as important as, if
>>not more so, than a Firebird vs. MySQL one. People who
>>are thinking of using PostgreSQL are likely to give Firebird
>>more serious consideration than MySQL.
>
>
> That's true; but is there really anything to gain from starting
> internecine wars between open source databases?

I don't mean to start an us-vs.-yours wars (accidentally
omitted the word 'comparison' after 'Firebird vs. PostgreSQL'),
but to glean more authoritative information as to what are
the real pros and cons of PostgreSQL vs. Firebird since I
am trying to choose between one of them for an 'enterprise-wide'
system. Setting up both for a comparison is very time and
expertise intensive, and I was hoping that someone out there
already had experiences to share.