Have you looked at Firebird database server?
It's open source, reliable, has an (open source) ADO.NET driver
(native CLR), offers stored procedures, triggers, declarative
referential integrity, and full Transaction support.
The code base is mature (it's an off-shoot of Interbase 6, which was
started 20 years ago, so it's more mature than SQL Server!)
It's also got a very sexy strategy for implementing transactions -
Multi Record Versioning. No locking is used (as normally understood),
instead the database maintains several copies of each record in the
table, with 'generation numbers' against them. You can only see the
record instances with lower numbers than your current transaction!
In fact it's impossible to use Firebird without transactions. I like
this approach, in other RDBMS's transactions seem 'bolted on'.
If rollback is needed, the transaction number is simply disgarded. No
active process of 'undoing' is required (no transaction log)!! It will
just leave a small amount of dead space in the datafile, which will
get claimed back next time the system garbage collects. Cool!
http://sourceforge.net/projects/firebird http://www.firebirdsql.org/ http://www.ibphoenix.com Pitty the websites look so bad :-(
John
[quoted text, click to view] "Vincent V" <vincentv@-n0-5pam-optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:<eeJN4XuRDHA.2148@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> Hey guys im about to start a large project and am wondering what
> DB server to use
> I have the Choise of MySql(innodb) or if i pay a bit extra i can get MS SQL
> 2000
> The concerns i have
> -What type of limited functionality will i come accros with MYSQL
> ie No stored POCS
> -Limitations with the RDBMS system of innodb
>
> If i go with MySQL + Innodb i think this will be offer the fastest runtime
> speed
> but how much more code am i going to need using MYSQL rather than MS SQL2K
>
Have you looked at Firebird database server?
It's open source, reliable, has an (open source) ADO.NET driver
(native CLR), offers stored procedures, triggers, declarative
referential integrity, and full Transaction support.
The code base is mature (it's an off-shoot of Interbase 6, which was
started 20 years ago, so it's more mature than SQL Server!)
It's also got a very sexy strategy for implementing transactions -
Multi Record Versioning. No locking is used (as normally understood),
instead the database maintains several copies of each record in the
table, with 'generation numbers' against them. You can only see the
record instances with lower numbers than your current transaction!
In fact it's impossible to use Firebird without transactions. I like
this approach, in other RDBMS's transactions seem 'bolted on'.
If rollback is needed, the transaction number is simply disgarded. No
active process of 'undoing' is required (no transaction log)!! It will
just leave a small amount of dead space in the datafile, which will
get claimed back next time the system garbage collects. Cool!
http://sourceforge.net/projects/firebird http://www.firebirdsql.org/ http://www.ibphoenix.com Pitty the websites look so bad :-(
John
[quoted text, click to view] "Vincent V" <vincentv@-n0-5pam-optushome.com.au> wrote in message news:<eeJN4XuRDHA.2148@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>...
> Hey guys im about to start a large project and am wondering what
> DB server to use
> I have the Choise of MySql(innodb) or if i pay a bit extra i can get MS SQL
> 2000
> The concerns i have
> -What type of limited functionality will i come accros with MYSQL
> ie No stored POCS
> -Limitations with the RDBMS system of innodb
>
> If i go with MySQL + Innodb i think this will be offer the fastest runtime
> speed
> but how much more code am i going to need using MYSQL rather than MS SQL2K
>
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
