I'm surprised you should see it like this. Before I decided to use
Firebird, in my last job I had been using Oracle. It is far more
complex and confusing than Firebird. When I started my own company, I
got multiple free licenses to DB2, but I have never used them, because
DB2 looks even more complicated than Oracle.

I turned to the open source databases and my choices were SAP db,
Postgresql, MySql, and Firebird. I chose Firebird because it looked
the simplest AND the almost the most feature-complete (Postgresql
seems to have a few features I would like, but seemed like it might
require higher maintenance, and wasn't available natively on Windows,
and didn't have such a wide-range of admin/developer tools).

Don't you think that any relational database is going to be at least
as complex as Firebird?

--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Bisma Jayadi" <bisma@b...>
wrote:

> Hi all,
> Firebird is a great powerful database engine but
> it's encapsulated within its own complexities. Some tasks that can

be done

> easily in other database engines, requires more work when it comes

to Firebird,

> regardless Firebird has better performance in the final result.

Confusing check

> constraint, complex date/time management, non-index based query

performance,

> unique-ID generator procedure, etc... just to mention some common
> problems/confusions are faced by the users.