From: Helen B. <he...@tp...> - 2003-01-30 22:57:48
|
At 05:02 PM 30/01/2003 -0500, you wrote: >The most significant difference I've found is transaction control where >Firebird wins hands down! For example, Postgres does not support nested >transactions. Firebird does--you just have to name them. No, Firebird doesn't support nested transactions. It does supported nested stored procedures. Firebird 2 will have named savepoints. >Postgres does have a wealth of functions but I think Firebird UDFs will >soon catch up here. Firebird isn't likely to aim to "catch up" with the bloatedness of PG and others. Some functions considered essential are being added to the language but FB isn't likely to change its stance radically and overload the engine with rarely-used functions. Firebird's small footprint is one of its big assets. UDFs can be added at any time and we'll see "the best" of new UDFs being made available in more new UDF libraries. There are already a lot available...the community needs to do a better job at publicising where to get them. >Already 1.0.2 supports NULLIF() and NVL(). It does; but the need for those UDFs has gone in Firebird 1.5, which supports COALESCE. I think CASE is there too, or in the process of being implemented. regards, Helen |