Fyracle: Oracle-Mode Firebird

mAriuZ writes "A beta is currently available that allow Firebird to support the major Oracle-based ERP/CRM application Compiere with virtually no change to the Compiere code base. No other proprietary or open-source database system can currently do this. The best part : Fyracle is open source if you want to compile it manually it's a set of patches that needs to be run over the firebird 1.5.1 source tree."

Comments

Mozilla...

[larley]

Is there anything they can't do?

Re:Mozilla...

[larley]

Yes I KNOW it's a different firebird. It's humour, people...

Re:Mozilla...

[boredMDer]

Render /. correctly 100% of the time?

Re:Mozilla...

[lphuberdeau]

They are talking about the database server, not the browser.

Re:Mozilla...

[citog]

Now I understand why your drone-alliance URL is so apt ...

Re:Mozilla...

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

Render /. correctly 100% of the time?
This is patched in the trunk, releases... umm, real soon now

This is really cool.

[djcapelis]

I've been wondering why someone could code an Oracle compatible database for a long time. This opens up a whole new range of possibilities as a lot of software is Oracle only. I hope this project continues to grow and mature and a few other databases do the same, it would be nice to see this happen with Postgres as well.

Re:This is really cool.

[Unordained]

I've been watching the devel list as those creating fyracle have been asking about how to go about implementing this compatibility ... don't expect these features to be merged into the main tree. Oracle's made some pretty silly design decisions along the way, and other database teams/vendors take exception at the suggestion they should reproduce the quirks found in other products. They're trying to build a good system from the ground up, nice and clean -- not copy every good or bad decision someone else made.

For some of us, that's a really good thing: ideas get re-thought and we get better solutions. For others, yes, that's a bad thing: software vendors go implementing their solutions for only one database server that costs out the butt, and think nothing of it -- software's expensive, why not make it more expensive? The client pays for it anyway, not the vendor. There are two solutions here: make a cheaper version of the database server (fyracle) or recode the application so it's not oracle-specific.

How many Oracle-clone databases do we need? Should we encourage vendors to continue making oracle-only software, should we encourage them to use badly-designed language features? (Oracle's a bit of a whore as far as implementing just about anything they think will get software sold -- even if it's an absolutely abysmal idea.)

Re:This is really cool.

[djcapelis]

I agree that bad decisions should not be continued. I also agree that oracle-only apps are annoying and a bad decision. And I don't want to support Oracle only apps.

However, outside the idealism, I'm glad to see that there is now an open-source solution. It's a similar issue as WINE and the network driver layers to the linux kernel. Yes a native well-done version would be better, but I'm still glad to know I can make it work with open-source software if I have to.

Re:This is really cool.

[perlchild]

Maybe what mysql will be doing between mysql and maxdb(compatibility proxy) would be a better fit for compatibility reasons?
Especially with oracle's cluster features?
I can just imagine someone taking the code from sqlrelay and hacking something similar.

So...

[Anonymous Coward]

When do we get Oracle-mode IE?

Explanation please

[Chris Pimlott]

Could someone explain exactly what this is?

Re:Explanation please

[Red Pointy Tail]

Compiere is an open-source implementation of an ERP+CRM system, the catch is that it requires expensive Oracle databases (as much of the functionality has been encoded using Oracle SPs and such). There have been lots of talk about migrating it to other databases like PostgreSQL and donations were even seeked but not much have progressed... until now.

Firebird (not to be confused with the Firefox browser) is another open source database based on Borland/Inprise InterBase - much improved now of course. Last I checked half a year ago, it has full ACID, distributed transactions *with savepoints* (postgreSQL can't), external/internal stored procs, triggers, subselects, referential integrity, ANSI compliant SQL, SMP support, ODBC/JDBC, triggers, up to 64Tb Databases, embedded build, native WIN32 build ... and ... with an amazingly small footprint of 2.5MB installation.

Anyway, it seems to me that the crux of Fyracle is not that they rewritten Compiere to run on Firebird. It seems like they engineered a layer to implement all Oracle-like features on Firebird. Anything written natively for Oracle should be able to run off it! If they can pull it off, you can just rip out Oracle and place Firebird in.

However, direct compatibility may not mean the ported application will run with the same performance and integrity as on an Oracle DB. But it is a very good step forward.

For those who need it

[xilmaril]

just for everyone with bad memory who didn't read the article (that'd be almost everyone),

it's FireBIRD, not FireFOX. it's the open source database that caused the browser to change it's name.

They've developed a version of Firebird that acts interchangeably with Oracle database. Which is good, since now people have a free alternative just in case they want it.

This `Firebird` confusion serves them right

[Anonymous Coward]

The Firebird SQL people threw a temper tantrum and forced the Mozilla developers into changing the name of their browser, all out of needless bickering. Now they stubbornly refer to their product as simply "firebird", as if nothing has changed and nobody will remember a much more popular product that went by that name.

Calling it "Firebird SQL" would solve the problem, but naturally that would be too sensible, right?

All these Mozilla jokes in here are just a natural reflection of the SQL developers' childish attitude toward the "Firebird" name issue. It's all well deserved.

Re:This `Firebird` confusion serves them right

[Anonymous Coward]

Firebird (the database) was there first. Why would they have to change the name instead of Mozilla browser? Do you have any sense of fairness?
So what that the browser is more popular. Is popularity a license to destroy the branding of other products?

the name game

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a funny article. In the spirit of naming conventions we should call it a "farticle".

Now that ibFireBird has done it...

[leonbrooks]

...I'm sure the competitive spirit will result in an Oracle compatibility model for PostgreSQL as well.

Re:Now that ibFireBird has done it...

[aled]

It's strange to me that Firebird got compatibility with Compiere before than PostreSQL. The later has a similar store procedure language to Oracle.

Alright!

[Anonymous Coward]

I just tried it and it... doesn't work!

Firebird (or Fyracle) is a database better left dead.. in the eighties where it started. It isn't like Unix you know...

Re:Alright!

[Anonymous Coward]

It works very well.

It's a database engine, you know, it's not something for kids to play around.

should not that..

[BigGerman]

.. be called "Orafox"?

I am sorry :-)

Necessary evil

[leandrod]

This is a (perhaps) necessary evil. The right thing to do would be to port Compiere to ISO SQL. The problem is that at the moment only IBM DB2 is standards-compliant. PostgreSQL comes close, but fails miserably on some important accounts for inertia: AUTOCOMMIT, CONSTRAINT ... NOT DEFERRABLE INITIALLY IMMEDIATE, lack of SQL/PSM...