Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firebird Relational Database 1.5 Final Out

simoniker posted more than 10 years ago | from the the-other-white-meat dept.

Software 445

firebirdy writes "The Firebird Project is pleased to announce that the v1.5 release of the Firebird database engine is now available for immediate download. The v1.5 release represents a major upgrade to the engine, which has been developed by an independent team of voluntary developers from the InterBase(tm) source code that was released by Borland under the InterBase Public License v.1.0 on 25 July 2000. Development on the Firebird 2 codebase began early in Firebird 1 development, with the porting of the Firebird 1 C code to C++ and the first major code-cleaning. Firebird 1.5 is the first release of the Firebird 2 codebase. Install packages are currently only available for Windows and Linux but other platforms should follow shortly." This product is not to be confused with newly renamed Firefox web browser, which was also called Firebird for some time.

cancel ×

445 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't forget... (-1)

SCO$699FeeTroll (695565) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366612)

...to pay your $699 licensing fee you cock-smoking teabaggers.

Thank you Eliot Spitzer! (-1)

Fecal Troll Matter (445929) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366675)

Today I received my payment for my claim in the settlement of the Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation!

It is a pleasure that this matter has been brought to a satisfactory conclusion!

-FTM(now $13.86 richer)

Re:Thank you Eliot Spitzer! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366859)

So you're finally going to get that scrotal window you always wanted!

ok (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366620)

ok, can you give firefox it's old name back? No one knows or cares about your project, but people actually give a fuck about firefox

Re:ok (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366634)

w0rd.

the only reason this shit was even posted to /. was because the name.

Re:ok (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366681)

This isn't a -1 post. Mod it up.

MOD PARENT UP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366712)

It's the truth not a troll.

Re:ok (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366811)

Troll? How is that a troll? Are the mods smoking crack?

Bah, troll.

Re:ok (1)

mfivis (592345) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366891)

it could do without the curses, but other than that, I completely agree.

Bleh (4, Insightful)

CeleronXL (726844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366624)

The only reason anyone even knows about them anyway is because of the former Mozilla Firebird. :O

Right (4, Funny)

pheared (446683) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366767)

So, I typed in slashdot.org but somehow I ended up on freshmeat.net. wtf?

Re:Bleh (3, Insightful)

CeleronXL (726844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366781)

Flamebait? Maybe. I don't think there's enough support of the FirebirdSQL system here to really be a successful bait of any flame. Though of course what I said is very true, regardless of whether or not it's negative towards the FirebirdSQL people. They gained incredible publicity through this. It's doubtful that this news post would be here today had it not been for the naming conflict, because no one would even care.

I agree and I hate the name Firefox (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366812)

The only reason ANYONE has EVER heard of these tools is probably because one of them contacted Mozilla and whined. This database can roll over and die for all I care, I want the name Firebird back. What's next, Thunderfox? gay. really gay.

TOASTER! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366626)

toaster,toaster toaser, do you have toast in you yet i think [rowdyruff.net]
so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Im not a toaster!!!!!!!!!!And one more
thing........YOUR A TOASER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND A COOKIE WITH MILK SOAGE
MILK!!!!!!!!!!AND A BUTT WITH POOP IN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Firebird.. (-1, Redundant)

Your_Mom (94238) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366633)

... isn't that the web browser I keep hearing about?

yupiiiiii (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366637)

1st POST FUCK OFF

Buyer BEWARE! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366638)

The archive linked is nothing but a bunch of goatse pictures of various resolutions zipped. Here's the real FireBird Torrent.

What torrent? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366670)

where? I think you fucked up your post mister!

Re:What torrent? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366773)

No, I didn't
it's right here [66.90.75.92]

Any idiot could of figured that out.

This project (5, Interesting)

aliens (90441) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366639)

Just kind of curious if anyone would care at all if there hadn't been the big stink with the name conflicts.

I mean, has anyone used this database? Is it really of any note that v1.5 is out?

Re:This project (1)

CeleronXL (726844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366679)

I don't think there's enough support for it elsewhere, such as in PHP, for it to be all that useful.

Re:This project (3, Informative)

Karamchand (607798) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366751)

Firebird is supported by PHP quite well. Just take a look at the InterBase Function Reference [php.net] for more information.
I guess Perl has a module for it as well...

Re:This project (0)

silex_reloaded (713469) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366742)

And is there a convincing reason for some developers to spend a few years of their valuable time making yet another relational database?

Re:This project (3, Informative)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366802)

Since Interbase was around long before MySQL and PostgreSQL, why did anyone bother making them? Besides, we need enough DBs to match the number of editors available.

Re:This project (5, Informative)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366797)

Its main claim is that it sucks less than Interbase [honeypot.net] , so if you have to support a horrid Interbase installation, then upgrading to Firebird would probably be a good idea.

On the other hand, I hated having to administer that hell-pit of a server so badly that I wrote a migration program [honeypot.net] to transfer entire databases from Firebird to PostgreSQL. I can't describe how happy I was to switch a fairly large online store [brownderby.com] 's backend to a modern platform.

Firebird/fox (-1, Flamebait)

ralf1 (718128) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366640)

wouldn't it have been easier to have these guys change their name and leave Mozilla alone?

Re:Firebird/fox (4, Informative)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366686)

It's not a matter of ease, they were around for a lot longer and had the name long before Mozilla co-opted it.

Finkployd

Re:Firebird/fox (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366766)

Great, so if I named one of my turds "slashdot" in 1983, I should be able to force Taco to call his website "slashfox"? Mozilla didn't co-opt shit; nobody had heard of or cared about this pissant database until they got all uppity.

Re:Firebird/fox (1)

errxn (108621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366845)

...so if I named one of my turds "slashdot" in 1983...

I'm afraid that's stretching the definition of 'prior art' to its very limit.

Re:Firebird/fox (2, Informative)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366854)

Not quite true, it cause some maning conflicts in some distros (in gentoo firebird refers to the DB and mozilla-firebird refered to the browser).

How hard is it really to do a search on freshmeat, sourceforge, and google before you name a project? I do it all the time.

Plus it isn't like it was a dead project or a one person project, it had a (albiet not MySQL size) following and was under active development.

Sorry, I love Mozilla but they were in the wrong here.

Finkployd

I thought it was Firefox (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366644)

fp

Firebird for web sites (3, Interesting)

chrysalis (50680) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366645)

How does it compare to MySQL for web sites, that typically makes a lot of short connections to the same database?

Re:Firebird for web sites (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366714)

Firebird works really good for Web sites.
Much better than Internet Explorer.

Re:Firebird for web sites (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366796)

Not sure, but I'll say that I will investigate it and give it a try for CGI/Web stuff because of the countless headaches one encounters with mysql.
I always thought mysql was a fairly 'lite' db compared say to Oracles tools, but in practice its given me nothing but trouble. I never heard of interbase before today, databases are not my thing, but I will give it a try. The list of people who put their trust in this software is also impressive.

Re:Firebird for web sites (4, Informative)

slycer (161341) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366906)

I used interbase at a previous shop (had to, the "fearless leader" was a borland guy through and through).

I can say that it seemed to handle fine, the server never crashed, there was never a corruption etc - and this was for fairly large databases as well (million+ records etc)..

Firebird I'm sure improves even further on it, the only problem I had with it was it's horrid horrid gui interface(s).

Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (0, Flamebait)

SeanTobin (138474) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366651)

You know, I really don't have anything against the firebird(tm) db people. I'm sure they are all fine coders and the DB is probably fairly decent. Personaly, I'm not leaving mysql anytime soon but that is beside the point.

I'm not looking at thier web page. I'm not considering Firebird(tm) for any projects. I'm not recommending it to other people. I don't even really care about any new features in yet another relational database.

Why? Why would anyone go out of thier way to not learn about a (free?) new database release? My reasons are simple. I don't like the way they handled the Mozilla/Firebird naming issue. Does that have anything at all to do with the quality of thier products? I doubt it. Should I be so shallow so as to pre-judge an entire company and thier products by the way they handle thier PR? Probably not... but I'm still not sending SCO $699.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366702)

Please explain, what exactly didn't you like about how they handled the naming conflict? You didn't like that they hadn't just given up their name?

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (2, Insightful)

SeanTobin (138474) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366883)

Please explain, what exactly didn't you like about how they handled the naming conflict? You didn't like that they hadn't just given up their name?
No, I do not think they should have given up thier name. They are entitled to use it as much as Pontiac is. From my understanding of the situation, the Phoenix code name was changed to Firebird, and then to Firefox for thier final brand. They were code names for projects similar to Merced or Coppermine. The final name was always going to be changed to something once the release came.

Also, from what I remember from the incident I had a very bad impression of the Firebird project. I no longer have any links but what I remember now about it (granted it may be totaly different from what actually happened.. but this is how I view it right now) was the Firebird people attacking Mozilla and writing a very forcefull letter demanding the name change. I believe that a less agressive approach would have produced the same results, and a more positive image for the company.

As far as the relational database vs SQL, I don't know *anything* about the firebird project. All I know is the title here on /. about the 'Firebird relational database.' I always believed the database was relationaly designed and interfaced via SQL but what do I know..

I've already generated a ton of negative comments about my post, but remember this is just my opinion. It's the opinion of a linux sysadmin/perl monk/mysql user who is probably in thier target market. I'm just letting them know why I just don't care.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366721)

+1, word.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (5, Interesting)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366722)

Specifically what did they do wrong in your eyes? When Mozilla takes an existing project's name are they just supposed to accept it and change their name? That doesn't sound very fair.

Finkployd

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (1)

{Hecubus} (62076) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366867)

Why can't they both just be called Firebird?

People who actually use a relational database should be smart enough to be able to tell the difference between Firebird the browser and Firebird the database.

Its not like they are competing products or something.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (1)

finkployd (12902) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366904)

Personally I don't care except that it sets a bad precedent. In this particular case few people really would care BUT I don't like the idea that it is OK to do this at all. You know if it were the other wat around Mozilla would have gone after them.

Finkployd

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (1)

lonenut (165873) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366918)

I think the problem for many people is the HUGE stink the FBDB folks made of the whole thing. I didn't hear Pontiac complaining when the Firebird DB people stole the name from them (or the indigenous peoples of the Americas where Pontiac stole it).
I mean really, the odds that someone would confuse 'Firebird the browser' with 'Firebird the database' are about as big as confusing 'Firebird the car' (or deity) with 'Firebird the database'.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (-1, Insightful)

leandrod (17766) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366726)

>
yet another relational database.

Firebird is SQL, not relational.

>
I don't like the way they handled the Mozilla/Firebird naming issue.

Why not? They were there before. They were the ones to be trampled upon by the great big dino.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (4, Funny)

MyHair (589485) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366769)

Firebird is SQL, not relational.

Yip yip yip! Ow! I sprained by brain!

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (5, Insightful)

cubic6 (650758) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366819)

Firebird is SQL, not relational.
There might be a reason why you're a DBA looking for a job. SQL is a query language, relational is a database design paradigm. As it says all over their homepage, Firebird is a relational database that uses SQL.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (1)

zangdesign (462534) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366915)

Why not? They were there before.

One's a database product. The other's a browser. Kinda hard to confuse the two, I should think. They don't compete in the same arena, unless you consider the entire open source/free software movement their arena.

In the end, it probably didn't really matter. Firebird is still obscure compared to some of the other longstanding offerings, and the name change didn't hurt the Mozilla team any, although I do wish they would stop naming each release, and just stick to one damn name.

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (1)

MyHair (589485) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366923)

Okay, I guess I could post a real post instead of attempted funny one-liners.

Firebird is SQL, not relational.

Actually, the title of the Slashdot article and the linked Firebird project page both proclaim that it is relational.

And I could be wrong, but I thought SQL is specifically for relational databases. I suppose you could use a simple SELECT statement on a standalone table, but I would think most SQL breaks without a relational database underneath.

I agree with your rebuttal of the grandparent post, though. What's wrong with another open source project? Especially one with dedicated people? I don't know if Firebird is useful to me as a database, but it doesn't take long for me to infer that there is a dedicated development team and community behind it, and I'm not about to go trying to convince them to support PostgreSQL MySQL or any other project.

And I can't understand why anyone would hold the naming issue against them. Maybe it was just a successful troll. Does the grandparent poster refuse to use Phoenix products, too?

Re:Firebird(tm) and why I just don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366821)

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

What did they have to do with it? (1)

PigeonGB (515576) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366929)

I thought that the Mozilla people were the ones who realized that they had taken a name of another Free/Open Source project, and they decided to change it. I didn't know anything about Firebird's developers acting like asses about it. Where did this info come from?

Nobody cares (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366654)

Ever hear of MySQL? No one cares about your comp sci 101 project.

mysql lets you put crap in your database (2, Insightful)

Stone316 (629009) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366711)

The only people I know that would use mysql as the backend for anything aren't DBA's. Why? Because it allows you to put crap in your database.. This has been debated countless times on /. so there's no point going through all the points again. Lets just say any DBA worth a grain of salt wouldn't use mysql.

Stupid Name Change Got Me Again.... (0)

FerretFrottage (714136) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366655)

At first I thought Firebird has a RDBMS built into it? No wonder it's so fast; it has the entire Internet in the database...then I remembered the name change. Doh

Firebird? Is that the web browser? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366657)

Click this! It's real funny! [www.goat.cx]

- If you're new to Slashdot, don't click links that point to goatse. # Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
# If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal. jolomo writes "A partner of Atlanta-based NASA Institute of Advanced Concepts is working on a concept they call MADMEN (Modular Asteroid Deflection Mission Ejector Nodes), which would launch a distributed attack against large Earth-bound objects. Thousands of MADMEN could be built by many nations and when launched, each would land on the object, drill into its surface and remove enough material to change its course." Spencerian writes "Learning Unix for Mac OS X Panther is a good tool for those who are experienced with the original Mac OS or Mac OS X, but not the Unix command line. Most of the content would not interest the traditional programmer, Linux, BSD, or other UNIX jockey, however." For Spencerian's take on why, read on for the rest of his review. spin2cool writes "New Scientist has an article about how AMD and Intel are planning on releasing new consumer chips with built-in buffer-overflow protection. Apparently AMD's chips will make it to market first, though, which some analysts think could give AMD an advantage as the next round of chips are released. The question will be whether their PR department can spin this into a big enough story to sell to the Average Joe." weebl writes "SlashNET is pleased to announce an upcoming forum with Marcel Gagne. He writes the 'Cooking with Linux' column every month for Linux Journal magazine. His first book was the acclaimed Linux System Administration: A User's Guide. Recently he wrote a book called Moving to Linux: Kiss the Blue Screen of Death Goodbye!, which is intended for consumer desktop users who are curious about Linux and want to give it a test run. The forum will be held on Monday February 23, 2004 at 8PM US Eastern Standard Time (-0500). As usual, the forum will be held in #forum. You will be able to submit questions both before and during the forum which will be used to guide the discussion." dkleinsc writes "The BBC is running an article about life as a female gaming squad. There's some discussion about the welcome or lack thereof women get in the gaming community, and arguments over whether it's a good idea to have separate women's matches." binner writes "Ars Technica features an article 'Deep inside the K Desktop Environment 3.2' written by Datschge and Henrique Pinto. After introducing KDE and the project's structure the authors present some new applications of KDE 3.2. After that they explain the key KDE technologies KParts, DCOP, KIO, Kiosk and KXMLGUI and give examples for code reusage and an overview of efforts to integrate non-KDE applications. For developers Umbrello, Cervisia and Valgrind with KCachegrind are introduced and of course KDevelop 3.0. An examination of licenses precedes the positive conclusion." Strudelkugel writes "The Wave Report covers a concept PC that NEC is working on, called P-ISM. (Maybe the name doesn't work, but it looks cool.) The design concept uses five different pens to make a computer. One pen is a CPU, another a camera, one creates a virtual keyboard, another projects the visual output and thus the display and another a communicator (a phone). All five pens can rest in a holding block which recharges the batteries and holds the mass storage. Each pen communicates wirelessly with the others." PizzaFace writes "Microsoft is reported to be spending strategically to influence the United Nations' standards for business data exchange. A UN standards-setting body, UN/CEFACT, and an industry-standards group, OASIS, had developed an open standard format for data interchange, called ebXML. Microsoft hired two people from UN/CEFACT, and a few months later the body decided to stop working on ebXML and instead to work on a Business Collaboration Framework for web services, promoted by Microsoft and IBM. Microsoft then paid for three UN committee members to travel to six countries to promote the BCF." osted by timothy on Monday February 23, @01:12AM
from the cia-factbook-time dept.
securitas writes "The BBC's Abbas Azimi reports on the rapid growth of the Internet and Internet cafes in Iran, apparently with the tacit approval of the government. Seven million Iranians have Internet access, or 10% of the population - double the rate two years ago. Access costs 60 cents/hour. The article describes how the Internet is used for everything from VoIP phone calls to chat and Web logs. Even Iran's vice-president has a daily blog on a popular site with 'musings about politics and life.' All of this despite the ban on many sites, which is easily circumvented by Iran's webmasters and geeks. An interesting point is that most of the PCs used in Iran are assembled from smuggled parts and run pirated versions of all the latest software (due to foreign embargo?). It sounds like a great opportunity for open source software."

In Soviet Russia (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366664)

In Soviet Russia, relational FIREBIRDS YOU!!!

Woohoo! (4, Funny)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366668)

I'm so glad this version of FireBird renders CSS properly... no wait...

Re:Woohoo! (2, Funny)

CeleronXL (726844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366740)

Most versions of the browser render CSS properly. O_o

Re:Woohoo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366820)

Way to not get it. O_o

:)

Re:Woohoo! (0, Offtopic)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366876)

Oh really?

Are we forgetting about Internet Explorer?

If you don't believe me, try creating a div field over a select dropdown... Horrible.

Who fucking cares? (-1, Troll)

Jailbrekr (73837) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366674)

After pulling the naming bullshit, I for one will do my damndest to avoid their product. There are better products out there, with far less baggage.

I have to trust my open source providers. These people, I do not trust.

Re:Who fucking cares? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366789)

Wow, two troll posts. You buy a sco license too?

Look up! is it a browser, is it a OS? (5, Funny)

Bender Unit 22 (216955) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366677)

no it's a database!

wtf (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366685)

no one gives a fuck about some open source bullshit. grow a dick and get laid nerds.

Ooooh, THAT firebird (3, Informative)

Eberlin (570874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366689)

Seriously, though -- I hadn't heard of this particular firebird before the Mozilla fiasco happened. I'm sure I can speak for a lot of folks who couldn't name this project when asked to name the OSS database apps they know.

Of course now they'll be known as the folks that got the name "Firebird" when Firebird changed its name to Firefox. Oh yeah, and they make a database.

Again (-1, Redundant)

alexborges (313924) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366700)

This product is not to be confused with newly renamed Firefox web browser, which was also called Firebird for some time...

Again

Um...yeah

In other news (4, Funny)

nebaz (453974) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366717)

Due to trademark infringement potential and other potential confusion, Firebird Database Engine has just changed its name to

F------d Database Engine

More news to follow.

P.S. For any lawyers, etc. reading this, the above is an example of "parody", not subject to the definition of "slander" or "libel".

Re:In other news (3, Funny)

ShinyBrowncoat (692095) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366784)

Due to trademark infringement potential and other potential confusion, Firebird Database Engine has just changed its name to F------d Database Engine
Are you sure that isn't "F----d Database Engine"?

Re:In other news (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366815)

P.S. For any lawyers, etc. reading this, the above is an example of "parody", not subject to the definition of "slander" or "libel".

It is, however, a very poor example. You may still be able to sue for some sort of emotional trauma.

Not interested... (-1, Flamebait)

jejones (115979) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366724)

The stunt they pulled puts them on exactly the same moral level as spammers, and I don't do business with spammers.

Assembling static data (4, Interesting)

polv0 (596583) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366730)

I work as a data-mining professional and aside from creating statistical models on flat-files, I manage the process of transforming and joining relational databases into a a flat file for model building.

Currently we use Oracle for this work, but in the past we tried switching to MySQL but found that it lacked some of the key features such as materialized views, nested sub-queries and a variety of Oracle SQL functions that we find useful. MySQL seemed to be geared towards maintaining a real-time database to support customer interaction, rather than as an environment for assembling static data sources.

Could Firebird be a viable open-source alternative, or are there others?

Re:Assembling static data (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366837)

PostgreSQL

Re:Assembling static data (2, Funny)

Derek Pomery (2028) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366841)

The features you mention are now available in 4.1 - they were never a priority since they are easily handled in code.
Granted, subselects save on network traffic (although it seems to me it can also be done a little more clunkily with TEMPORARY tables).

Don't see where you see this distinction between real-time and static data in MySQL, but until you're more specific about the host of Oracle features, I still won't know.

I, on the other hand, am still annoyed that Oracle doesn't allow taking a slice of a result set and still can't do outer/left/right joins in a standard fashion.

Re:Assembling static data (1)

FlashBac (720033) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366847)

Have a look at the latest MySQL beta specs.

How do I use this thing? (1)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366736)

They don't make this apparent in their homepage. How do I use this? Is there an ODBC driver? Can I talk to it with a PHP driven website?

Re:How do I use this thing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366772)

RTFM, my dear.

Re:How do I use this thing? (1, Redundant)

zippity8 (446412) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366824)

AFAIK, Firebird still retains the same interface as Interbase.

This means that PHP4.0 has full support for it -- but I'm not sure how this applies with the new version of firebird.

http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.ibase.php
http ://www.ibphoenix.com/a6181.htm

Drum roll please... (-1, Redundant)

psyberjedi (650736) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366746)

(Insert Mozilla-based browser joke here)

Re:Drum roll please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366855)

sunnuvabitch! I liked it better when It was a browser.

SQL not relational (-1)

leandrod (17766) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366756)

SQL is not relational. Its tables are not relations, because relations are sets, and sets don't contain duplicates.

There are several other reasons why SQL (and therefore derived products) aren't relational, check Database Debunkings [dbdebunk.com] for more info.

Re:SQL not relational (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366828)

>SQL is not relational. Its tables are not relations, because relations are sets, and sets don't contain duplicates.

Yeah, but if you relationate without any protection, you're going to somehow end up with look-alike duplicates...

Re:SQL not relational (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366857)

Rows have implicit unique row ids which make each row unique. So, there are no duplicates.

No thanks. (1)

Fizzlewhiff (256410) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366776)

I'm waiting for their more resource efficient Sunbird product.

Only got one thing to say about Firebird: (1)

Cecil (37810) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366778)

I love PostgreSQL. It's OO, blazingly fast, easy to install, robust, and free as free can be. All sorts of things that Firebird is not. And the name doesn't have a chance of *ever* conflicting with anything. Hah.

Re:Only got one thing to say about Firebird: (1)

AKnightCowboy (608632) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366861)

I love PostgreSQL. It's OO, blazingly fast, easy to install, robust, and free as free can be.

Easy to install? I guess if you've installed it before. I found it amazingly complicated to install and never did get it working right. I ditched it for MySQL which was much simpler. I never need to screw around with the pg_hba.conf file (or whatever it is) to setup access permissions.

Re:Only got one thing to say about Firebird: (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366933)

Mysql easy?? I couldn't even begin to get it to install so I had to revert old school and use a sheets of paper and a filing cabinet for my database.

Re:Only got one thing to say about Firebird: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366894)

Well, firebird is blazingly fast, easy to install, robust, and free as free can be, what's your point exactly? That it is not OO?

And they may have to change it again (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366780)

A company called FIREFOX used to exist in the UK,
and yes, it manufactured software.

boring. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366783)

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted.

Pain in the ass to build (4, Informative)

mr_majestyk (671595) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366790)

I tried building the Firebird code a few months ago, and found out that step 1 is...

...start with a running version of Firebird!

Bootstrapping might seem like a K00l trick, but there is something uncomfortable about self-referential build procedures (not to mention that it was a pain in the ass to find a preexisting version of Firebird to run).

Gimme a pile of c/cpp & h files and let me build it from scratch, dammit!

Is that possible today? Dunno...the build guide [sourceforge.net] appears to be still under construction.

Oh, the stupidity... (5, Insightful)

agoliveira (188870) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366803)

Why are you people bashing so hard about the naming issue? You know what? I don't care!
I know Firebird DB since it's earlier days and I was a Interbase user before that. And I loved it. Why? Because the kind of job I did that time required a simple, efective, maintence-free database and Firebird is exactly that. You can just install it and forget it. The whole database is just one file (at least was) so a simple tar or zip will backup your stuff.
Yeah, yeah, I know there is MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc but as I said, I'm not on this kind of job anymore and even if I was, while firebird does what I want (and well) why should I care about other RDBMS?

Re:Oh, the stupidity... (4, Interesting)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366925)

The whole database is just one file (at least was) so a simple tar or zip will backup your stuff.

That's all well and good, except that you're completely wrong. First, you can back up any database that uses OS-level files using tar and gzip - that's certainly nothing special for Interbase/Firebird. Second, we experienced table corruptions constantly that resulted in rows that were still present in the table, but couldn't be fetched. Relational integrity means jack squat when referenced rows suddenly cease to be accessible.

Interbase/Firebird obviously worked for at least some people, or else it would've been altogether dropped years ago, but it's bitten enough people that it's just not accurate to call it "maintence-free" (unless that has a backhand slam at the abyssmal state of the administrative tools, and you meant "-free" as in "-not-capable-of").

marketing... (3, Funny)

Unominous Coward (651680) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366813)

You know what, a good product often has to revamp its image in order to accelerate takeup. I suggest they change their name to something fiesty, energetic and powerful-sounding.

Why not combine the fiestyness of a fox with the power of fire. I suggest something like Foxfire or Firefox!

One Firebird... (5, Funny)

holizz (737615) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366818)

to serve up pages, one to view them... and one Firebird to rule them all?

you fail it..Q. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366830)

the mos7. Loo4 at

Can anyone actually run it? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8366851)

So how many slashdotters actually downloaded it and attempted to run? The damn thing doesn't even compile on RedHat 9.0 with the latest GCC.

don't jump to conclusions (2, Insightful)

VegetariMan (162508) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366873)

I don't know a thing about Firebird, but I'm not prepared to dismiss it simply because of a name conflict with Firefox. Maybe it's a great database. Maybe they didn't treat Firefox fairly when disputing the duplicate name. Maybe they had a legitimate right to their name and the Mozilla folks should have been more diligent about picking a name.

Either way, I doubt the people at Firebird deserve the occasional vitriol from others on this thread.

An extremly light weight SQL Engine? (2, Funny)

ciroknight (601098) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366900)

Well, firebird is definitely a good contender, but I still want a database server that's fast and small... and the faster and smaller the better. Problem is I need most of the features you'll see in a high end one, and I need it to be open source.. SQLite was actually a contender at one point, but I want replication as well.. so.. my question is when is someone gonna fill this niche?

I just installed it..... (0, Redundant)

mojo17 (607881) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366912)

...but i cannot seem to find the Tabbed Browsing thingie :(.

For those of you hung up on the whole name issue (3, Insightful)

greenhide (597777) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366913)

If you go to the Firebird Project website [sourceforge.net] , you'll see they feature, quite respectfully, Mozilla's recent decision to change their name to Firefox. Remember that the Mozilla team has gone through a lot of name changes. Camino was changed to Chimera, and Phoenix was changed to the rather unfortunate "Firebird" which was already a project name. So it's not like the name "Firebird" was all that entrenched.

I think it's a symptom of Mozilla both try to brand, and being an Open Source project in which one monolithic product was split into various and sundry projects, each of which got bizarely named. I mean, there's nothing about any of the application titles that indicates its use or purpose.

I myself vote for MozillaMail and MozillaBrowser or something of that ilk instead of Thunderbird and Firefox. Then the package now called "Mozilla" could be renamed to MozillaComplete or something like that.

Wait a minute! (-1, Troll)

Chuck Bucket (142633) | more than 10 years ago | (#8366930)

I thought it was called Firefox?

(lame, i know it)

CB
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>