Re: Postgres vs Firebird?

From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
To: lists(at)benjamindsmith(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres vs Firebird?
Date: 2005-05-04 19:19:28
Message-ID: 1115234368.3868.16.camel@state.g2switchworks.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 13:48, Benjamin Smith wrote:
> As a long-time user of Postgres, (First started using it at 7.0) I'm reading
> recently that Firebird has been taking off as a database.
>
> Perhaps this is not the best place to ask this, but is there any compelling
> advantage to using Firebird over Postgres? We have a large database (almost
> 100 tables of highly normalized data) heavily loaded with foreign keys and
> other constraints, and our application makes heavy use of transactions.
>
> I say this as my company's growth has been exponential, showing no sign of
> letting up soon, and I'm reviewing clustering and replication technologies so
> that we can continue to scale as nicely as we have to date with our single
> server. (now with a load avg around .30 typically)

With some of the changes Tom recently made in the code in CVS,
PostgreSQL now looks capable of scaling to >4 CPUS (somewhere between 8
and 12 is where things start to drop off suddenly) while for firebird,
handling >1 CPU is a relatively recent development.

I'd say try them both, benchmark them, and see what you think. But keep
in mind that you really need to use a 4+ CPU machine to get a feel for
the scalability of both in a large server environment.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mohan, Ross 2005-05-04 19:34:05 Re: Postgres vs Firebird?
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2005-05-04 19:08:47 Re: Postgres vs Firebird?