[DUG] Why InterBase

[Robert martin]

> "How well does it scale" is a difficult question. I have heard that IB/FB doesnt
> do well with multi-table joins once no. of tables gets above 3. I havent tested.
> On single table is scales extremely well once got rid of the 2GB file
> size limit. One application that did for a client (hi Alan!) needed fast indexed
> access to tables with many millions of records. FB could outgun our
> oracle server even on inferior hardware!  Tools for DBA? What DBA?
>
>
>   

We use FB and have had few problems with the performance of complex 
multi table joins (10+ tables).  Any issues with these are related to 
optimizer or DB structure issues.  I don't know about IB but FB 2.0 is 
supposed to provide major improvements in this area.  But even on FB 1.5 
you can just restructure your SQL if its a problem, most aren't.

We have been very happy with FB and its features / performance.

My understanding is that FB 2 provides the following, which seem to 
address the criticism's that have been leveled at it...

1. Vastly improved optimizer.
2. Improved index structure (goes with 1)
3. table names extended (256 characters ?)
4. Many more built in functions.  Apparently having few internal 
functions was an initial design decision to keep size down.

It seems to be horses for courses but FB / IB provides everything most 
NZ businesses require.


Rob Martin
Software Engineer

phone +64 03 377 0495
fax   +64 03 377 0496
web www.chreos.com

Wild Software Ltd