interbase vs sql server

Question

Post reply

interbase vs sql server

mbear

SSC Enthusiast

Points: 150
More actions
June 17, 2003 at 2:54 pm

#81788

What type of DBMS is better, interbase or sql server? I've read some specs and am in a toss up, any help would be great! Thanks in advance

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Frank Kalis SSC Guru Points: 111183 More actions · Answer 1

Hi mbear,

quote:

What type of DBMS is better, interbase or sql server? I've read some specs and am in a toss up, any help would be great!

I guess that's one of the questions where you'll never get an ultimate answer. There are so many factors influencing this decision. Maybe it helps when you post what you want to do?

Cheers,

Frank

--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url]

crosspatch Hall of Fame Points: 3108 More actions · Answer 2

Depends whether you want a desktop or an industrial-strength solution. Interbase is fine if all you want is a small discreet desktop datbase solution similar to MSACCESS.

If on the other hand you want the speed, power, scalability and robustness offered by a mainstream RDBMS then choose SQL Server over Interbase everyday.

Don't get me wrong Interbase is a good robust product, but in my opinion, it's a question of size (isn't it always?) Interbase is a good 'Home' solution, SQLServer (and for that matter ORACLE) are profesional enterprise solutions.

I have found it is possible to please all of the people all of the time if you do exactly what they want. Harold Macmillan 1961

mbear SSC Enthusiast Points: 150 More actions · Answer 3

Thanks for the reply. We are inplementing a WAN and updgrading our software at our corporation. The applications we will run will start small, but have to potentialy to need some real power behind it. Want to buy right the first time (if that is possible 😉 I'm really leaning toward SQL server for the robust power, Interbase to me seems, like you said, better for small business.

crosspatch Hall of Fame Points: 3108 More actions · Answer 4

I'm always wary of things that "start small" It's been my, sometimes painful, experience that a succesful "small" application grows exponentially. As users discover it works and produces results they want to use it and grow it more and more.

If you don't want to be the victim of your own success buy into something that may at the outset be an overkill, but has the capability to absorb the growth without any need to migrate.

My current client is a Bank using what was a "small" MIS system which in three years has become core to their business, average table size a million rows, with some holding several million rows.

Boy would we have been in trouble if we had started out with MSACCESS (as was suggested) rather than SQL Server.

I have found it is possible to please all of the people all of the time if you do exactly what they want. Harold Macmillan 1961

Frank Kalis SSC Guru Points: 111183 More actions · Answer 5

Hi mbear,

quote:

Thanks for the reply. We are inplementing a WAN and updgrading our software at our corporation. The applications we will run will start small, but have to potentialy to need some real power behind it. Want to buy right the first time (if that is possible 😉 I'm really leaning toward SQL server for the robust power, Interbase to me seems, like you said, better for small business.

in this case I would also prefer SQL Server as for scalability, security, multi-user issues....

Cheers,

Frank

--
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
Webmaster: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs
My blog: http://www.insidesql.org/blogs/frankkalis/[/url]