Re: PostgreSQL vs Firebird feature comparison finished

From: "Stephen Ince" <since(at)opendemand(dot)com>
To: "Tony Caduto" <tony_caduto(at)amsoftwaredesign(dot)com>, "Greg Smith" <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs Firebird feature comparison finished
Date: 2007-08-27 16:02:21
Message-ID: 0fc101c7e8c3$a7044490$8100a8c0@desktop2
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Postgres can't be embedded or serverless. Firebird has the embedded feature.
Most of the databases have this capability (hsqldb, derby,oracle,mysql,
firebird, and db2). Derby and hsqldb are the only free embedded databases
for commercial use.

I recently ported a schema from postgres to firebird and found name size
limitations. Firebird has a limitation on the size of it's column names,
table names, constraint names and index names. I think the size limitation
on firebird is 31 characters. Postgres doesn't have this limitation.

Steve

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manuel Sugawara 2007-08-27 16:02:43 Re: Audit-trail engine inner-workings
Previous Message Vivek Khera 2007-08-27 16:01:10 Re: Bigtime scaling of Postgresql (cluster and stuff I suppose)