On 17/06/2010, Henry Vermaak wrote: > > Say I've got a couple of desktop programs that want to share > data/settings, why on earth would I want to install a fully fledged > database server?
Because it was designed for concurrency and multi-user support. BTW: The full fledged Firebird RDBMS is a whopping 12MB install - smaller than most desktop applications. So I would hardly say it's an effort to install - and Firebird is known for its "deploy and forget" installation style. No need for tweaking or other setups (unlike MS-SQL-Server, Oracle, DB2) > Even jet databases (mdb) support locking. Yeah, and very crude at that - using a little external file (*.ldb) with records. I can't even quote the amount of issues we have with that in our applications. Windows freeze or application crash and the *.ldb is left there blocking the program and more often than not the mdb file ends up being corrupt too. Microsoft documentation clearly states it's for single user access only - for good reason. I'm pretty sure even Embedded Firebird database will work better in a multi-application concurrency system than MS-Access. Anyway, the point is, that the full fledged Firebird is easier, quicker and less effort to install that most applications. So if you want concurrency, use the right tool for the job. For 99% of desktop applications that simply want to store data in a single user database instead of flat-file or XML, the Embedded Firebird will do just fine. -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/ -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
