| Subject | Re: [ib-support] Longevity of firebird / Interbase |
|---|---|
| Author | Raymond Kennington |
| Post date | 2002-09-04T07:18:54Z |
Rather than the size of the development team, it is more important who is on that team and
also who is supporting Firebird.
The calibre of people developing and supporting Firebird is 2nd-to-none.
In particular, Ann Harrison and Helen Borrie pop into mind. These are remarkable people.
There are also many tools available for developing with Firebird.
As FB is based on the open-sourced IB, if all else fails, one could convert to the
open-source IB as a last resort.
However, because FB is open-source, and is most likely the most powerful free database
available, and because it is being used by a large number of people --- judging by the
numbers of downloads --- it is more likely that it will get better and better.
Well, that concludes my basic reasoning for deciding to use it.
I've chosen it for use on stand-alone pc's that will be used by thousands of farmers
world-wide. It is a complex program with 200 tables, hundreds of triggers, exceptions,
stored procedures, views, queries, etc. The value of the data to be managed will be in the
billions of dollars and these people's livelihoods will depend on reliability of the
database. Having transactions with triggers makes it possible to preserve database
integrity. The first version of this program used Paradox tables.
Raymond Kennington
"M Patterson (Multinail)" wrote:
also who is supporting Firebird.
The calibre of people developing and supporting Firebird is 2nd-to-none.
In particular, Ann Harrison and Helen Borrie pop into mind. These are remarkable people.
There are also many tools available for developing with Firebird.
As FB is based on the open-sourced IB, if all else fails, one could convert to the
open-source IB as a last resort.
However, because FB is open-source, and is most likely the most powerful free database
available, and because it is being used by a large number of people --- judging by the
numbers of downloads --- it is more likely that it will get better and better.
Well, that concludes my basic reasoning for deciding to use it.
I've chosen it for use on stand-alone pc's that will be used by thousands of farmers
world-wide. It is a complex program with 200 tables, hundreds of triggers, exceptions,
stored procedures, views, queries, etc. The value of the data to be managed will be in the
billions of dollars and these people's livelihoods will depend on reliability of the
database. Having transactions with triggers makes it possible to preserve database
integrity. The first version of this program used Paradox tables.
Raymond Kennington
"M Patterson (Multinail)" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> We ust had a strategy meeting with a consultant today. We've adopted firebird
> for out factory management system, and he was suggesting that because it is only
> little known we should find something with a more stable future.
>
> So, after the meeting I looked up the Powered by pages on the IBPhoenix site,
> and well, they don't seem to have changed much, and a number of the links were
> broken. Hmmm..
>
> But does any one have any stats about the uptake and support of firebird? And
> how big and active is the development team?
>
> Regards
> Mark
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/