Interbase vs Firebird
Joe H
back I bought Codebase for Clipper with a view to writing a replacement
for our database in Delphi. When I tried working with it, I ran into
the situation that Clipper allowed me to use non-standard index filters
all over the place and so I couldn't access the existing databases with
delphi without re-doing many thing. Never had the time to go further.
I've been using Delphi since D2 but no database work in it so far. I
see on Google and in this group, Interbase and Firebird mentioned in
the same statements all over the place. Are the two database formats
similar or the same or are they related some other way? From what I've
seen Firebird looks like a better choice for less than huge
applications since the free version of Interbase stopped in 2001 if I
read that right?
And what about the free version of Oracle 10g xe. Is that actually
usable for real work without requiring upgrades or really deep learning
curve? I searched the Oracle site and could not figure out what the
limits actually were and when to expect to need a paid version.
Firebird looks to be easier to set up and get going with.
Mitchell Vincent
>
> Firebird looks to be easier to set up and get going with.
I haven't used Firebird in production so take everything that follows
with a grain of salt.. But..
Firebird as a file based database is bigger and slower than SQLite and
doesn't support any access over shared (network) drives. Most databases
don't support simultaneous access on network drives *well*, but most do
support it for single users. This was the real deal killer for me.
Last I checked Firebird has no native boolean type. I know there are
fairly easy ways to get around that but I'd be lyging if I said I didn't
hold that against it when I tested new databases.
The "super server" installation looked promising but all I saw were
opportunities for the user to mess with the database server outside my
software. Some of my users have trouble "finding" the Start button - I
can't imagine getting them to setup a database server (or teaching them
how to configure multiple computers to use a central database). I was
also a bit concerned about using Firebird as I didn't know what would
happen if I tried to install it on a machine that was already running it.
Right now my plan is re-write the database routines to use ODBC and
support PostgreSQL as a target database to support simultaneous users
but keep SQLite for single user or file-based access. I'm always open to
other ideas if anyone has any!
--
- Mitchell Vincent
- K Software : http://www.ksoftware.net
- Association of Shareware Professionals : http://www.asp-shareware.org
- File Download Hosting : http://www.swmirror.com
Craig Stuntz [TeamB]
> Are the two database formats
> similar or the same or are they related some other way?
Firebird and IB use a different file format which shares a common
ancestor. So there's stuff in common, but they're not directly
compatible.
> From what I've
> seen Firebird looks like a better choice for less than huge
> applications since the free version of Interbase stopped in 2001 if I
> read that right?
There is a free Developer Edition of IB which you can use to create
your app, but there is no free redistributable edition.
If you're looking for a free C/S DB you might want to consider SQL
Server Express. It's a good DB, although it can hog the machine it's
installed on and ideally would go on a box by itself.
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] · Vertex Systems Corp. · Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz
All the great TeamB service you've come to expect plus (New!)
Irish Tin Whistle tips: http://learningtowhistle.blogspot.com
Joe H
Is SLQlite another choice or just another name for vs sql express?
I note on the microsoft site, that "it is easy to integrate into the
IDE", of course they mean the VS ide, right? Not sure why I would need
to "integrate" a database program into my IDE. I presume the db aware
components would take care of most of those details.
Anyway, I do need the server to work across my lan and at this time I
really don't want it accessible from the Internet. I have a machine
that we use to make CD's for an hour or so each day that currently
hosts our db and even when making cd's it's not a problem for the
clipper database at this time. I had assumed that a client server
database would actually work better with tcp/ip across the lan but you
have me worried about that now.
No one said anything about the oracle free version. Is it so limited
that it would not work? or is it so complicated that it would require a
ton of effort to learn?
I'm not a novice programmer but certainly no expert on c/s databases
and I don't expect to ever have the time to do commercial development
of databases again. I just want something that's reasonably simple to
set up and evolve to fill our in-house needs mostly to replace our
Clipper db. And I'd like to be able to talk to the database like the
old dbase dot.prompt and that appears to be what SQL is about
(obviously will have to dig into that more).
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB]
> Is SLQlite another choice or just another name for vs sql express?
SQLite:
...is /completely/ different than SQL Server Express:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/sql/
> I note on the microsoft site, that "it is easy to integrate into the
> IDE", of course they mean the VS ide, right?
They do, but Delphi integrates with it, too, albeit differently.
> Not sure why I would need
> to "integrate" a database program into my IDE. I presume the db aware
> components would take care of most of those details.
Delphi lets you browse DBs and alter data. VSs integration is, not
surprisingly, more integrated, but less cross-DB support.
> No one said anything about the oracle free version.
I didn't comment since I don't have personal, direct experience with
it.
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] · Vertex Systems Corp. · Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz
Useful articles about InterBase development:
http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz/category/21.aspx
Dan Palley
"Mitchell Vincent" <mi...@nospam.ksoftware.net> wrote in message
news:4644bb83$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Joe H wrote:
>>
>> Firebird looks to be easier to set up and get going with.
>
> I haven't used Firebird in production so take everything that follows with
> a grain of salt.. But..
>
> Firebird as a file based database is bigger and slower than SQLite and
> doesn't support any access over shared (network) drives. Most databases
> don't support simultaneous access on network drives *well*, but most do
> support it for single users. This was the real deal killer for me.
Unlike file-based databases like dBase and Paradox and Access, Interbase
(and Firebird) require that all interaction with the database happen via the
server process and not by accessing the file directly. Typically, all
that's required for a remote user to connect to the database is a TCP/IP
connection; no shared directories need to be set up. The database file
needs to be located on the same server where Interbase is running, but I'm
not sure that's much of a limitation.
Dan
A Pham
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/db2/express/
There is no limit comparing to Oracle Express or MS SQL Express.
A Pham
"Joe H" <joed...@att.net> wrote in message
news:4644...@newsgroups.borland.com...
Joe H
About my stupid sqlite = sqlServer Express question, I looked it up
right after I posted and realized I should have looked it up first.
Oops. Sorry about that.
So its between:
Sqlite - recommended
SQL Server Express - recommended
DB2 Express - recommended
Oracle Express - no comment
Firebird (Open Source active)
Interbase (Open Source Inactive)
Whew, quite a list! Thanks all. I had read a previous post where
someone said you only had two choices if you didn't want a paid
version, Firbird and Interbase. Guess they were wrong. From what I
could tell the paid version of Oracle standard would cost about $1500
for 5 users. DbExpress which isn't on this list as there is no free
version I'm aware of, would cost about $1000. I have no idea what
others would cost or if my figures are right. Free sounds pretty good
for now. Open source has it's attraction, too, if only as a place to go
as a last resort to track down a problem. It is nice to have so many
choices (probably too many though). I am not a great fan of Microsoft
so even if it's good I would want to look at others first. I guess I'll
take a look at each one before I put much work into them. Thanks for
the rapid feedback.
Joe H
I just tried to figure out what the lowest cost would be for, say 4
users, for the DB2 Express C software if I had to buy a license for
some reason! It appears that everything is based on how many users are
licensed? It's even more convoluted than Oracle's pricing. What's the
deal with this? Maybe working with the database would enlighten one as
to what you would have to buy? It's certainly not clear up front.
I really don't want to dig into something that will take me up against
a brick wall that will cost a couple of thousand dollars to get past at
some unknown point in the future -- after I have invested a lot of time
and work into it. I'd like to know up front all the parameters of that
point and what the cost would be to go beyond it. Is that unreasonable?
All the companies giving away these express or lite editions must be
counting on that kind of scenario -- else why do it? Maybe I just don't
understand all the terms being used. I know if I were selling a
solution based on any of these products (I'd like to just call them
databases but that's apparently not appropriate), I would have to know
these things in order to price my own work.
Del Murray
which includes all the tools to manage the db for 49 bucks which is really
cheap.
Ivan Pastine
> Last I checked Firebird has no native boolean type.
AFAIK the new Firebird 2 has a native boolean.
@remove_meabvisie.nl Arno Brinkman
> Sorry, but I'm from the world of dBase, Foxbase & Clipper. A few years
> back I bought Codebase for Clipper with a view to writing a replacement
> for our database in Delphi....
Any RDBMS you choose works different than dBase. That's something you must remember when rewriting your application.
There are many free suitable RDBMSs out there that you can use. Firebird, Oracle, MSDE, etc...
Firebird is a small-footprint installable database engine compared to Oracle, MSDE. So you can keep your own installer
also small with the database engine included.
You can use Firebird as an embedded dll with your application (only your application will be able to use it then) or use
the server/client configuration.
Regards,
Arno Brinkman
ABVisie
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
General database developer support:
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com
Firebird open source database (based on IB-OE) with many SQL-99 features:
http://www.firebirdsql.org
http://www.firebirdsql.info
Support list for Interbase and Firebird users:
firebird...@yahoogroups.com
Nederlandse firebird nieuwsgroep:
news://newsgroups.firebirdsql.info
Martijn Tonies
> that it would not work? or is it so complicated that it would require a
> ton of effort to learn?
Oracle is always more complex :-)
It's also very powerful. A machine can take only 1 Oracle XE instance
though.
If your users aren't powerusers, I would keep them away from Oracle.
--
Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, NexusDB, Oracle &
MS SQL Server
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
My thoughts:
http://blog.upscene.com/martijn/
Database development questions? Check the forum!
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com
Martijn Tonies
> If you're looking for a free C/S DB you might want to consider SQL
> Server Express. It's a good DB, although it can hog the machine it's
> installed on and ideally would go on a box by itself.
Mind you: you can only install 1 instance of SQL Server Express
on a machine. So if your target user has it installed already, you should
create a database inside that instance.
Leonardo Bidi
Hi, Joe. You can test also Advantage DataBase Server,
www.advantagedatabase.com
It's has compatibily with dbase files, has it's own type of files, you can
use SQL or navigational
commands, also has a free developer edition and free local files up to 5
users besides the server edition.
Check it out, give it a try.
Regards
Leonardo Bidi
Mitchell Vincent
When I looked into it a year or so ago they had a file based version and
a server version. The server version, as I understood it, wasn't hands
off and required some system configuration to work correctly.
However, I see things have changed for the better! :
http://www.firebirdsql.org/manual/ufb-cs-embedded.html
I'm going to have to give this a try!
Mitchell Vincent
> Firebird is a small-footprint installable database engine compared to Oracle, MSDE. So you can keep your own installer
> also small with the database engine included.
> You can use Firebird as an embedded dll with your application (only your application will be able to use it then) or use
> the server/client configuration.
I'm looking at FireBird again but if I read their "embedded server"
documentation correctly (and I may not have), there is no remote access
so I'm not sure what the advantage to it over anything else is.
Right now I'm using SQLite and it works *extremely* well until you put
the database on a network drive and have more than one user open it.
I'd *love* to have a "xcopy" deployable database server that I could
install by default with my own installer to allow different workstations
on a customer's LAN to connect to any one workstation as a data source.
Anything that requires my user to install the database software
separately just isn't a good idea. My users would be instantly terrified
if I told them they had to setup a database server (even if that just
meant running and installer and clicking next 4 times).
I'd sure like the ease of SQLite (through ODBC) with some multi-user
support! I've asked a few questions on the FireBird list to see if I
misunderstood the embedded server documentation.. Here's hoping!
Sam Larson
Joe,
Why not try the new ElevateDb from www.elevatesoftware.com? It is
the successor of DBISAM. There are no royalties, has full text indexing
and is faster than DBISAM.
Sam
Thorsten Engler [NexusDB]
> I'd love to have a "xcopy" deployable database server that I could
> install by default with my own installer to allow different
> workstations on a customer's LAN to connect to any one workstation as
> a data source.
NexusDB would fit the bill nicely then. The default server application
(nxServer.exe) can simply be xcopy deployed. The same exe can be run
both as interactive application or it can be registered as a service by
starting it with /INSTALL once.
If you don't like our default server it's very easy to create your own:
http://www.nexusdb.com/tutorials/server_sbs.html
It's very easy to create an application that can both connect to an
external server or/and (at the same time) use a fully embedded (no
external DLL or other dependencies) server engine. An "embedded server"
on a "client" application can be made available over the network in the
same way as shown in the screencapture above.
http://www.nexusdb.com/onlinemanualv2/Architecture/index.html?deployment
options.htm
Cheers,
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Engler
Principal Architect
Nexus Database Systems Pty. Ltd.
http://www.nexusdb.com
Joe H
> Joe,
> Why not try the new ElevateDb from www.elevatesoftware.com? It is
> the successor of DBISAM. There are no royalties, has full text
> indexing and is faster than DBISAM.
The prices for ElevateDb with source code are not unreasonable and I
would seriously look at that if I were doing an outside job based on a
dbms, but as I've said in my earlier posts, I'm doing this for in-house
work with probably never more than 4 or 5 simultaneous connections. So
for now, I'm really looking for a free solution and preferably one with
source available so I'm going to check out firebase first and work out
from there. Thanks for another choice and for taking the time to answer.
Dan Palley
> When I looked into it a year or so ago they had a file based version and a
> server version. The server version, as I understood it, wasn't hands off
> and required some system configuration to work correctly.
I think you're referring to the embedded version that only requires a dll to
run. This version is designed to be single user (actually single process)
and would not work with multiple users on a LAN.
Any multi-user setup you create will require a certain amount of tweaking.
For example, if you're using a file-based server, then you'll need to create
a shared folder and make sure the clients have the correct permissions for
the share as well as the proper UNC configured. With Interbase/Firebird,
you would need to install a DLL on each client once the server has been
configured.
Dan
Sam Larson
Joe,
Then Firebird is the best bang for a free database. It's more
difficult to work with so you may be interested in The Firebird Book by
Helen Borrie. You can read about it on Amazon and it should help get you
up to speed with Firebird.
Sam
Helmut Woess
...
> Mind you: you can only install 1 instance of SQL Server Express
> on a machine. So if your target user has it installed already, you should
> create a database inside that instance.
Hmmm, which version of SQLExpress do you use? I have 3 instances on the
same PC - and it is SQLExpress, not Developer or Server or so.
bye,
Helmut
Martijn Tonies
> > on a machine. So if your target user has it installed already, you
should
> > create a database inside that instance.
>
> Hmmm, which version of SQLExpress do you use? I have 3 instances on the
> same PC - and it is SQLExpress, not Developer or Server or so.
Can't remember what version exactly, but from what I've seen,
SQL Express is a named instance of SQL Server 2005 and you
cannot change the instance name, so that would make it a single
instance only.
Am I wrong here?
Helmut Woess
>>> Mind you: you can only install 1 instance of SQL Server Express
>>> on a machine. So if your target user has it installed already, you
> should
>>> create a database inside that instance.
>>
>> Hmmm, which version of SQLExpress do you use? I have 3 instances on the
>> same PC - and it is SQLExpress, not Developer or Server or so.
>
> Can't remember what version exactly, but from what I've seen,
> SQL Express is a named instance of SQL Server 2005 and you
> cannot change the instance name, so that would make it a single
> instance only.
>
> Am I wrong here?
I think so :-)) SQLExpress is the version name and if you install it with
default parameters it creates an instance with name SQLExpress. But if you
start the installer and disable the automatic (it's the checkbox on the
bottom in the window where you enter your name and company, soon after the
system check), you will be asked in one of the following
windows for the instance name. And you can do this multiple times.
bye,
Helmut
Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
>
> When I looked into it a year or so ago they had a file based version
> and a server version. The server version, as I understood it, wasn't
> hands off and required some system configuration to work correctly.
There has never been a "file-based" version of Firebird or InterBase - if
you mean a bunch of separate files for each table, index, etc. like Dbase or
Paradox.
The truly embedded version means it can compile into your executable, but
the trade off is that *only* your application can access the database you
connect to. If you want multiple applications or client computers to
connect, you must use the server version.
--
Wayne Niddery - Winwright, Inc (www.winwright.ca)
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
justice is no virtue!" - Barry Goldwater
Craig Stuntz [TeamB]
> I think you're referring to the embedded version that only requires a
> dll to run. This version is designed to be single user (actually
> single process) and would not work with multiple users on a LAN.
I'd go further than this:
No "Server-less" DB will work well with multiple, concurrent users,
ever, whether it's Firebird, Paradox, or anything else.
If you want multiple users, you should use a DB server.
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] · Vertex Systems Corp. · Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz
Borland newsgroup denizen Sergio González has a new CD of
Irish music out, and it's good: http://tinyurl.com/7hgfr
Martijn Tonies
Helmut, thanks for setting this straight and clearing this up.
Joe H
> Dan Palley wrote:
>
> No "Server-less" DB will work well with multiple, concurrent users,
> ever, whether it's Firebird, Paradox, or anything else.
>
> If you want multiple users, you should use a DB server.
If you mean a hundred users or more, then maybe that's true but I've
been using a Clipper database I wrote that is shared by five machines
across a lan and it has been working WELL by my standards for at least
8 years, now. We've never had a problem using the program concurrently.
When we first switched to XP, I had to tweak a registry setting to keep
XP from screwing it up with 30 and 40 second delays when starting the
program or when doing a search, but with that tweak it has been no
problem since and responds instantly.
I realize that a server based system will work better (theoretically).
The only reason I feel compelled to change is that I know I can do the
job far better in Delphi and the GUI will make a far easier to use
program (and my 98 machine hard drive died and I can't see doing all it
would take to fix it and I had to rig clipper to run on xp where it is
not at all comfortable). Many of the tasks I had to do with the clipper
database required a number of kludges including batch files and short
bp7 programs to create serial keys, fancy print labels and such and all
of these could be done directly in Delphi making a much more easily
maintained program.
Andrew V. Fionik
You wrote on 11 May 2007 15:00:40 -0700:
JH> Oracle Express - no comment
Oracle Express also recommended. :-) By using Oracle Express your
application will be inherently enabled for work with Oracle.
---
Andrew V. Fionik. SQL Maestro Group, http://www.sqlmaestro.com
Database administration, management and development tools for
Oracle, MS SQL Server, PostgreSQL, Firebird, MySQL, MaxDB, SQLite.
Craig Stuntz [TeamB]
> If you mean a hundred users or more, then maybe that's true
No, I think it's true for >= 2. You may feel free to disagree, but I
feel that, beyond the fundamental design issues inherent in having
"more than one master," relational database management systems have
built-in support for high concurrency that no file-based "server," no
matter how stable, can match.
And of course nearly all significant file-based "servers" are being
dropped by their supporting companies in recent years. CA-Clipper is
gone. FoxPro is on the way out. Paradox is history. Etc.
Saying that a single example of some design has functioned correctly
is not the same thing as saying it's a good design, generally speaking.
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] · Vertex Systems Corp. · Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : http://blogs.teamb.com/craigstuntz
All the great TeamB service you've come to expect plus (New!)
Irish Tin Whistle tips: http://learningtowhistle.blogspot.com
Craig
> been using a Clipper database I wrote that is shared by five machines
> across a lan and it has been working WELL by my standards for at least
> 8 years, now. We've never had a problem using the program concurrently.
> When we first switched to XP, I had to tweak a registry setting to keep
> XP from screwing it up with 30 and 40 second delays when starting the
> program or when doing a search, but with that tweak it has been no
> problem since and responds instantly.
>
How often do you re-index?
Craig.
Joe H
Maybe two or three times a year and I have had to open one or the other
of the databases manually to correct a bad value every so often--again,
not more than once or twice a year and it's always because I failed to
trap invalid values somewhere. The database is backed up every day and
I've only had to restore maybe two or three times in the past five
years and then we never lost any data. The entire database with all
index files and the program itself are not more than 100mb and zip to
about 10mb.
I'm certainly not recommending Clipper or any of the other old
databases for future work. I will switch to some sql based db. At first
I was going to do firebase but after installing the server and messing
with gser and isql and some of the other commandline tools, I do
believe I will give the ms sqlserver a shot. Turns out that my son has
been working heavily with that for some years but never mentioned it to
me so I have a knowledgeable resource.
--
Martijn Tonies
> Maybe two or three times a year and I have had to open one or the other
> of the databases manually to correct a bad value every so often--again,
> not more than once or twice a year and it's always because I failed to
> trap invalid values somewhere. The database is backed up every day and
> I've only had to restore maybe two or three times in the past five
> years and then we never lost any data. The entire database with all
> index files and the program itself are not more than 100mb and zip to
> about 10mb.
>
> I'm certainly not recommending Clipper or any of the other old
> databases for future work. I will switch to some sql based db. At first
> I was going to do firebase but after installing the server and messing
> with gser and isql and some of the other commandline tools, I do
> believe I will give the ms sqlserver a shot. Turns out that my son has
> been working heavily with that for some years but never mentioned it to
> me so I have a knowledgeable resource.
Don't mess around with the command line tools, get yourself
a decent GUI tool like Database Workbench -> works with
Firebird, InterBase, MS SQL Server, MySQL etc...
Herman
If it's true FB 2.0 has a native Boolean, where do I get documentation
on this?
Regards
Herman
Ivan Pastine schreef:
Thomas Steinmaurer
> If it's true FB 2.0 has a native Boolean, where do I get documentation
> on this?
Firebird 2.0 doesn't have a native BOOLEAN data type.
--
Best Regards,
Thomas Steinmaurer
LogManager Series - Logging/Auditing Suites supporting
InterBase, Firebird, Advantage Database, MS SQL Server and
NexusDB V2
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
Craig
> Don't mess around with the command line tools, get yourself
> a decent GUI tool like Database Workbench -> works with
> Firebird, InterBase, MS SQL Server, MySQL etc...
>
I agree, if you are trying to use Firebird out of the box you will have
trouble. But there are many excellent tools, including a free edition of
IBExpert, that make it very easy.
Craig
Ivan Pastine
Roland Bengtsson
> Joe H wrote:
> About my stupid sqlite = sqlServer Express question, I looked it up
> right after I posted and realized I should have looked it up first.
> Oops. Sorry about that.
>
> So its between:
> Sqlite - recommended
> SQL Server Express - recommended
> DB2 Express - recommended
> Interbase (Open Source Inactive)
Have you considered mySQL www.mysql.com? It's a opensource db that is
very mature and fast. There is also commercial support for it.
Regard Roland
Joe H
No I had not considered this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
The 51mb download will be a problem for me with dialup as will 241mb
download twice for SQL Server Express from M$ but I will look into it.
FB was only 4mb (maybe 6 with the half dozen other elements with it).
--
Rob Uttley
wrote:
> No I had not considered this. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
> The 51mb download will be a problem for me with dialup as will 241mb
> download twice for SQL Server Express from M$ but I will look into it.
> FB was only 4mb (maybe 6 with the half dozen other elements with it).
Joe, if your machine already has the .net 2.0 framework on it, you really
don't need to download all that SQLExpress stuff. Your end-user
application certainly won't need all that SQL Server Express Management
application, nor the developers docs, and to be honest you don't even
really need it all to get started as a developer.
SQLEXPR32.EXE is your friend in this regard, and it's only about 37Mb.
I made an installer for my application the other day that included the
DOTNETFX.EXE file (to install the .Net 2.0 framework, 22Mb), SQLEXPR32.EXE
and my own application and the whole thing was a shade over 61Mb. That's
with a last-generation WISE installer too, so I wasn't doing anything
clever or fancy with installer packages and background downloads.
Having said that, I do miss the relative ease, simplicity and small
footprint of Interbase 6.0. :-)
Rob
--
Robsoft Systems Ltd, Chester, UK
r...@robsoft.co.uk http://www.robsoft.co.uk
Mitchell Vincent
> Mitchell Vincent wrote:
>> When I looked into it a year or so ago they had a file based version
>> and a server version. The server version, as I understood it, wasn't
>> hands off and required some system configuration to work correctly.
>
> There has never been a "file-based" version of Firebird or InterBase - if
> you mean a bunch of separate files for each table, index, etc. like Dbase or
> Paradox.
>
> The truly embedded version means it can compile into your executable, but
> the trade off is that *only* your application can access the database you
> connect to. If you want multiple applications or client computers to
> connect, you must use the server version.
>
By file-based I only meant that the entire relational DB is stored in 1
file. That is the case with Firebird embedded as far as I can tell.
Loren Szendre
> By file-based I only meant that the entire relational DB is stored in 1
> file. That is the case with Firebird embedded as far as I can tell.
Probably a good idea to avoid the term "file-based", as it has a
specific meaning (think Paradox and Access). The data is always stored
in one file for InterBase and Firebird (unless you specifically opt for
additional files). Embedded or not, the data is in one file. I would say
that ~99% of IB and FB users do not break their databases into multiple
files.
Loren
Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
>
> By file-based I only meant that the entire relational DB is stored in
> 1 file. That is the case with Firebird embedded as far as I can tell.
That's the case for *all* Firebird and InterBase versions.
--
Wayne Niddery - Winwright, Inc (www.winwright.ca)
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and
stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
Mitchell Vincent
Noted.. Thanks Loren!
Wayne Niddery [TeamB]
>
> Have you considered mySQL www.mysql.com? It's a opensource db that is
> very mature and fast. There is also commercial support for it.
mySQL might be open source, but it is *not free* in all cases.
--
Wayne Niddery - Winwright, Inc (www.winwright.ca)
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go
away." - Philip K. Dick
Mitchell Vincent
> Mitchell Vincent wrote:
>> By file-based I only meant that the entire relational DB is stored in
>> 1 file. That is the case with Firebird embedded as far as I can tell.
>
> That's the case for *all* Firebird and InterBase versions.
>
I thought so! I understand the confusion over my use of "file based". I
suppose I was contrasting the way database servers like PostgreSQL and
MySQL store "databases" across many files on the file system.
For my multi-user system I think I'll end up trying out FireBird as my
experiments with PostgreSQL on the desktop haven't really bee
successful. PG is just too much, really..
Mitchell Vincent
> Roland Bengtsson wrote:
>> Have you considered mySQL www.mysql.com? It's a opensource db that is
>> very mature and fast. There is also commercial support for it.
>
> mySQL might be open source, but it is *not free* in all cases.
>
PostgreSQL, on the other hand, is :-)
Loren Szendre
make sure to download IBExpert Personal Edition (they just released a
new version on May 3). I have many projects in IB and FB, and IBExpert
makes all the difference in the world. Wouldn't leave home without it.
And if you go with Firebird, make sure to get 2.0.1, and read the
release notes carefully.
Loren
klemmo
> new version on May 3). I have many projects in IB and FB, andIBExpert
> makes all the difference in the world. Wouldn't leave home without it.
and if you use the 45 days trial version, which has additional stored
procedure/trigger
debugger, database metadata comparer, data comparer, performance
optimizing tools,
additional ibeblock scripting engine, ER Database Designer,
Querybuilder, integrated
Versioncontrolsystem, Logmanager, Project viewer, dependencies viewer,
blobsupport
in scripts,and much more, you will definitly see a lot of advantages
compared to a
standard PostgreSQL installation.
And all these features can be used for interbase and firebird. We have
customer who
use this combination with very complex databases which much more than
25000
database metadata (tables,triggers,sp, etc) objects.This requires a
fully functional
and well organized IDE.
Did you ever try to find the sp or trigger in your database which use
a sql statement
without an index? or a sp or trigger that stores a varchar(40) field
in a char(20) variable
(typical problem, also in employee database, which will only make a
problem when
the customer reaches the limits of length). IBExpert Full Version
shows you all this
globally with a simple mouseclick and gives you hints how to fix it.
Interbase and Firebird are really great platforms for database
development. We
know this since a very long time and we never had a reason to tell a
customer, that
he had to change to another system, when we were involved in their
project for
performance support. We found solutions also for really large database
with up to
800 Million records per table and databases with terabytes of size.
Most databases
are much smaller, but programmers often ignore the technology behind.
Especially
when you are in a 24*7 environment, you will see the differences also
compared
to PostgreSQL which requires much more administrator knowledge and
reacts really
ugly when garbage collection is not working. Some things may be faster
here or there,
but in general, you can say that interbase and firebird is the most
easy to use
professional database system that exist.
A large Customer does his daily business calculations and working
reports
based on a firebird database and a delphi application written by us
since about
5 years without any knowledge on this server. it just works 24 hours a
day,
365 days a year, with automated hot backup. If the server is
restarted
for whatever reason (they had one harddisk crash and a mainboard
failure), they just
restart the system without doing anything, when the operating sytem is
started, you
can also start using the database from any clientsoftware.
This is what a database should require for the enduser. Nothing!
Especially not an
administrator who plays around with this and that param to make it
faster (or
sometimes slower).
But this requires a knowledge of the technology and database
structures on the
developer side. And it will definitly be not a good way to use isql
for this. A fully
functional IDE gives you a much better productivity also on the
database side.
Holger
www.ibexpert.com
Dave White
news:464927ed$1...@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Then Firebird is the best bang for a free database. It's more difficult
> to work with so you may be interested in The Firebird Book by Helen
> Borrie. You can read about it on Amazon and it should help get you up to
> speed with Firebird.
>
Not too difficult though - I moved to Firebird (actually, IB first) directly
from a dBase background with absolutely no knowledge of relational
databases, and was able to pick it up very quickly.
Joe H
> Not too difficult though - I moved to Firebird (actually, IB first)
> directly from a dBase background with absolutely no knowledge of
> relational databases, and was able to pick it up very quickly.
I can't get a client to work from another machine on my lan.
I've read all of the sql statements and they are mostly just like the
dot prompt in dbase/foxbase. I understand the ones that aren't and have
no problem playing around with them with isql on the machine with the
server. I've made databases and set up tables and played with queries
with no problem.
I've installed odbc drivers, I've downloaded everything I could see
related to firebird that looks like it will be useful or has been
recommended. I installed iboconsole and it seems unable to connect to
the database or server on the machine running the server--it certainly
doesn't see any servers running. When I try to register a new non-local
server, it is asking for the server name (the only one I could guess at
was "Firebird Server - Default Instance" which is the name mentioned in
admin services but I've tried fbserver too, then it asks for the server
alias, and I have no idea what that could be. Anyway, I've tried
everything I can think of and can find absolutely no documentation on
this. I can ping the other machine by it's network name and by it's ip
number so obviously tcp/ip is working. I'm also sharing an Internet
connection between the machines. I have my lan running on ipx/spx with
netbeui because of it's security and because tcp/ip kept hanging up
when we were running mostly win98 boxes. All are on XP or xp pro now
but the local net has been working without a hitch for three or four
years now. All have the tcp/ip protocol as well but I'm not sure it's
set up for the network though I can ping any of the 5 machines from any
of the others by number or network name. Could the ipx/spx be the cause
of the problem? I certainly don't want to change that setup lightly.
Very frustrating.
I have no fear of dealing with sql or with the firebird server or
laying out my database or writing my own client for this but I first
have to see the server from my development machine and be able to talk
to it. If anyone can see what I'm missing, I'd very much appreciate
hearing about it.
yannis
> Dave White wrote:
>
>
>> Not too difficult though - I moved to Firebird (actually, IB first)
>> directly from a dBase background with absolutely no knowledge of
>> relational databases, and was able to pick it up very quickly.
>
> I can't get a client to work from another machine on my lan.
>
> I've read all of the sql statements and they are mostly just like the
> dot prompt in dbase/foxbase. I understand the ones that aren't and have
> no problem playing around with them with isql on the machine with the
> server. I've made databases and set up tables and played with queries
> with no problem.
>
> I've installed odbc drivers, I've downloaded everything I could see
> related to firebird that looks like it will be useful or has been
> recommended. I installed iboconsole and it seems unable to connect to
> the database or server on the machine running the server--it certainly
> doesn't see any servers running.
It will never see any servers running there is no service that can find
all the firebird servers on a net. You have to know in which computer
the firebird server is running in order to connect to it.
> When I try to register a new non-local
> server, it is asking for the server name (the only one I could guess at
> was "Firebird Server - Default Instance" which is the name mentioned in
> admin services but I've tried fbserver too,
Issue number one.
When the connection request a server name then this name is the
computer's name on your local network. And When I say computer's name I
meen the computer that has the firebird server installed on. So as a
server name use the name you have used to ping the computer or the IP
address if you would like.
> then it asks for the server
> alias, and I have no idea what that could be.
Nothing much just a label. It asks you how would you like to call this
server example FB_Developing or FB_TESTING or FB_Production etc. Just
give it a name which you can use to identify this server from other FB
servers on the same net.
[Snip....]
Please try to identify each single issue one by one and ask here. You
will find a number of knowldgeable people willing to help but we need
to know the issues or a detail description of the steps you took and
the software you tooked them with.
Do not give up it took me a couple of days to understand the connection
thinky and I had a 2 years background with MSSQL server when I started
playing with firebird.
regards
Yannis.
@remove_meabvisie.nl Arno Brinkman
>> Not too difficult though - I moved to Firebird (actually, IB first)
>> directly from a dBase background with absolutely no knowledge of
>> relational databases, and was able to pick it up very quickly.
>
> I can't get a client to work from another machine on my lan.
...
TCP/IP is needed to let it work fine.
Assume jou installed the firebird server with default settings on PC-X and trying to connect from the client PC-Y.
First test to see if you can connect to the firebird server on the server self (PC-X).
Next ping PC-X from the client PC-Y.
Try to connect from PC-Y to PC-X with IBOConsole for example.
By default Firebird will use port 3050 so be sure the firewall isn't blocking this!
You can find a very good starting document (Firebird 2.0) here:
http://www.firebirdsql.org/pdfmanual/Firebird-2.0-QuickStart.pdf
Regards,
Arno Brinkman
ABVisie
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
General database developer support:
http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com
Firebird open source database (based on IB-OE) with many SQL-99 features:
http://www.firebirdsql.org
http://www.firebirdsql.info
Support list for Interbase and Firebird users:
firebird...@yahoogroups.com
Nederlandse firebird nieuwsgroep:
news://newsgroups.firebirdsql.info
Joe H
> will find a number of knowldgeable people willing to help but we need
> to know the issues or a detail description of the steps you took and
> the software you tooked them with.
>
the box helps and that Alias is a user choice name helps. Used that
info and this time in iboconsole, when I registered a server, I did not
get the hourglass and failure message. However:
When I try to "Logon to the server" it takes probably a minute and then
reports that the server failed to respond.
Next I tried to "Diagnose Connection"
for the DB Connection, it failed with error 335544721 (I sure hope the
size of that error code doesn't indicate how many potential errors are
available). I used the location of a database which I had created on
the server machine and gave the passwords that work with isql when
running on the server.
for TCP/IP
ping = successful
21 = successful
ftp = successful
3050 Socket Error #10060 Connection timed out.
gds_db - program hung and had to stop with task mgr
2nd time same error as 3050 above.
for Netbui connection and it Passed with the following named pipe:
\\192.168.0.9\pipe\interbas\server\gds_db but that looks like Interbase
and not firebird.
SPX test failed immediately.
I've checked my network protocols and tcp/ip is installed on my
development machine xp-pro and the server machine xp home. And the
Advanced properties are all set to default. Do I need to "Enable
Netbios over TCP/IP" and will that interfere with my normal operation
using NetBios over ipx/spx?
> Do not give up it took me a couple of days to understand the
> connection thinky and I had a 2 years background with MSSQL server
> when I started playing with firebird.
Thanks. I've seriously been tempted to bail on this. I've spent more
than a couple of evenings so far and two weekends and other than the
work on the server machine itself, it's been fruitless.
yannis
[snip...]
I am sure that what you are experiencing is a firewall issue.
Try to disable the included XP firewall in order to see if it needs to
be configured before allowing a connection from the outside world.
Please disable the firewall on both boxies (development and server).
I remember that I had to add the port as a service in the firewall it
self on an XP machine before being able to connect to it.
Sorry I do not have a more descriptive proccess but I haven't installed
firebird on XP for a couple of years now and I do not remember the
details.
Regards
Yannis.
Joe H
You are right. I added Port 3050 to the server's machine and problem
solved! Thanks.
--