Firebird SQL is a lightweight, open-source database known for its ease of deployment and cross-platform compatibility on Linux, Mac OS, and Windows. It offers powerful database features, making it suitable for those seeking alternatives to systems like InterBase.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Firebird SQL | 12.9% |
| SQLite | 14.9% |
| SAP HANA | 11.9% |
| Other | 60.3% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 10 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 3 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 197 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 114 |
| Large Enterprise | 201 |
Firebird SQL provides minimal administration and integrated event capabilities, ensuring reliable performance similar to MS SQL Server and Oracle. It supports seamless data migration, effective stock management, and strong documentation, appealing to users transitioning from other database solutions. Despite its strengths, enhancements in performance, automation, integration, and user-friendliness are needed, along with improved scalability and large database management. Features like a graphical user interface, better security, and encryption are also desired.
What are the key features of Firebird SQL?Firebird SQL is implemented in industries for applications like ERP systems, data storage, and code auditing with SonarQube. Its zero-administration capabilities make it ideal for entities focusing on bank accounting, enterprise applications, and healthcare where relational data management is key. It supports international logistics and sensor data storage and is embedded in many custom applications.
Elekt Labs, Streamsoft, wobe-systems GmbH, DRB Systems, Moscow City Hospital #31
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Research and Development Project Manager at Sixense Monitoring | 4.0 | We use Firebird for data storage in our sensor-based monitoring software due to its reliability and ease of management. While it handles large databases up to four terabytes, managing them can be challenging. We're also considering MongoDB for future use. |
| Retail Solution & BI Manager at a tech services company with 51-200 employees | 4.0 | We are satisfied with Firebird SQL's event capabilities and transactional features for non-critical, continuous solutions. However, it struggles with large databases, requiring indexing and maintenance. Considering alternatives like PostgreSQL and Oracle for new applications as we expand. |
| Chapter Lead at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees | 3.5 | We use Firebird SQL as an open-source database for customer data, chosen for its similarity to InterBase. However, its performance has declined since version 3, lacking monitoring, just-in-time dumps, and journaling features compared to InterBase. |
| Strategic Advisor at TradeWindow | 4.5 | My company uses Firebird SQL for its accounting software serving around 300 clients, valuing its reliability, performance, and ease of use. While desirable for large sites, it lacks database sharing. Previously, we used InterBase with no issues. |
| Owner at Ventaja Competitiva | 4.5 | I use Firebird SQL for banking accounting and record management. The solution is reliable with excellent documentation and ongoing improvements, though it lacks a graphical user interface, which would be a beneficial addition for database management tasks. |
| Owner at Intersoftware sas | 4.5 | We use Firebird SQL for ERP and enterprise solutions due to its robustness, though cryptography has room for improvement. While it competes well with Oracle and SQL Server for smaller applications, it's not ideal for millions of users. |
| DevOps · IT at Software Entwicklung | 4.0 | I built applications using Firebird SQL and found it easy to use with minimal issues, saving time and costs. Although stable and resource-efficient, it lacks easy Visual Studio integration. I'm considering MariaDB for better integration options. |
| Executive Director at Dynamic Tomorrow | 4.0 | I use this stable, scalable embedded database for its zero-administration and no-server benefits, despite its initial complexity and lack of user-friendliness. It's a valuable, free solution that I rate 8/10. |
| Operational security at GOS | 3.5 | I am a student using Firebird SQL to create databases. Its most valuable feature is efficient database creation, though security for users could be improved. I haven't considered other solutions or specific cloud providers, so I can't comment on alternatives or ROI. |
| Head of IT Department / Oracle DBA at Sonabel | 3.0 | I use Firebird SQL for resource planning and appreciate not having to pay external fees for data migration. However, technical support and performance need improvement, as users occasionally face access issues and it's unclear if it's a database or configuration problem. |
We are working on monitoring software that involves making a lot of measurements with sensors. We store all the data in Firebird, which is why we use It primarily for data storage.
It's difficult to describe how it has improved our organization because we have been using Firebird for a very long time, and for us, it's normal to use Firebird. We have adapted to it, and it aids us efficiently.
The reliability and ease of management are very valuable. We don't need a team to manage Firebird unlike Oracle or MongoDB. Firebird can be set up simply without needing a lot of people for database management.
We would like to improve the management of very large databases. We have databases up to three or four terabytes, and it's not so easy to manage such large databases.
We have been using Firebird for 20 years now. It's our main database.
It's very easy to install and manage.
We have looked into MongoDB. That said, it is not my job to make the switch.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
We are happy with the event capabilities of Firebird SQL database. We can raise events from it and display them in our application.
We are also happy about the transactional features of the database. Moreover, it is pretty easy to maintain, but in some cases, when dealing with a large amount of data, up to 15 gigabytes, it is a little slow. Maintaining the database becomes harder.
However, if we use it within a comfortable database size, we are very satisfied because we are employing it in a non-critical but twenty-four-hour solution. So, overall, we are pretty happy with it.
On large databases, we have some difficulties. It is one of the areas of improvement. For example, under one gigabyte, it works perfectly. Between one and five gigabytes, you might experience some slight performance issues, but they are not significant. Beyond that, you have to index it, tier it, and perform some restore operations to free up space. It requires some effort, but it's manageable. It's quite challenging for the customer.
Moreover, migrating from one firewall solution to another was a little bit difficult regarding the backup and restoring the other one. Since we have many databases, we didn't go forward with the latest versions.
I have been using Firebird SQL for 15 years. We are currently using version 2.5, not the latest features.
We didn't reach out to customer service and support extensively. However, we did seek some solutions in the past. We visited forums and utilized open support resources. Lately, we haven't felt the need for it.
We worked with MySQL, and before that, we used Oracle. We still use Oracle for certain other solutions, but not for this specific requirement of our database. So, our expertise lies in this particular aspect of databases.
PostgreSQL has crossed our minds. Currently, we are evaluating whether we should make the switch or continue with Firebird. Another option we are considering is using Oracle because they also have a free solution for a certain amount of data. I don't know the exact limit, but it's something available for free, but it tends to use more resources compared to Firebird.
I've been using Firebird SQL for 15 years. From my perspective, Firebird is very easy to maintain, install, and deploy new applications. It's effortless to work with. However, in some cases, there may be areas where we could use more assistance.
It's not that I need too many people for the maintenance. It's just that when I perform maintenance, the database goes down. That's why I don't like it.
We are using the free solution, so there is no cost involved.
We are looking forward to developing a new application, we are exploring whether to stick with Firebird or try something else.
We aim to expand our business, and considering our past issues with Firebird, we are uncertain about continuing with it. Even if we are familiar with handling Firebird and the firewall, moving away from it would be a straightforward process.
However, we are actively exploring alternatives. Currently, we mostly use it on the Windows platform, but I know it also works on Linux. Though we haven't utilized it on Linux yet.
In terms of the number of databases we have in our solutions and the amount of data we handle, which is significant, I can say that I'm satisfied with Firebird.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
We use Firebird SQL as a database to hold our customer or patient data.
We chose InterBase for our main database around 20 years ago. InterBase is a proprietary software by Embarcadero. Firebird SQL is an open-source solution. Firebird SQL is very similar to InterBase, and we wanted to choose an open-source solution. Transferring data from InterBase to Firebird SQL eight to ten years ago was easy.
Firebird SQL's performance has slowed since Firebird SQL 3 or 3.5 versions, where they developed over-the-wire encryption. I wouldn't recommend the solution to others for performance. The solution should add some monitoring features for the database. Firebird SQL should add the just-in-time dumps and journaling feature if it doesn't already have them.
I have been using Firebird SQL for eight to ten years.
Approximately, 500 users are using the solution in our organization.
InterBase was our first database management system, and we still use it. However, we extracted some parts in the Firebird SQL database. The main advantage of InterBase over Firebird SQL is that it is much faster. InterBase has these just-in-time dumps. I don't know if Firebird SQL has these dumps by now. Earlier versions of Firebird SQL could do backup and restore, but they didn't have just-in-time dumps.
InterBase has a journaling feature, and I don't know if Firebird SQL has it. The advantage of Firebird SQL over InterBase is that it is an open-source solution and not proprietary.
Firebird SQL significantly improved our data management in many parts of our self-developed ERP system. I rate the solution's performance and speed a six out of ten. Two or three database administrators are needed to maintain the solution.
A few years ago, migrating data to or from Firebird SQL was a little bit difficult because the identifier names for tables or stored procedures were limited to 20 to 30 characters. Transferring the structure to Firebird SQL was difficult, but they fixed it in version 3, which was much easier.
We are developing software with Delphi, and Delphi is also by Embarcadero. Using InterBase or Firebird SQL databases is very common, and you have some good tools for developing with Firebird SQL.
Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
My company uses its own software for accounting purposes. My company also has around 300 clients using our software, which uses Firebird SQL as a database. My company has software for the international logistics industry, so we use Firebird SQL in our company.
The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is reliable, offers good performance, and is easy to use.
Database sharing is a capability that Firebird SQL lacks. With database sharing, we can split the database into different machines. Database sharing is a functionality I would like to see in the solution, especially when implementing it at very large sites.
I have been using Firebird SQL for ten to fifteen years. My company is a partner system integrator of the product.
I don't remember the version of the solution I am using.
I have had no issues with the stability of the product since it has always been a 100 percent reliable product and much better than the other databases available in the market.
The multi-platform part is not good, especially when locked into things like Windows. You can judge your platform with Linux or Unix or whatever since they are good.
The product is scalable for all the purposes we need while also providing the same scalability to the clients and their varying range of users. The product's scalability is super high.
My company caters to the needs of small, medium, and enterprise-sized customers.
My company hasn't ever required the help of the product's technical support since it has always worked properly.
In the past, my company had an experience with a product called InterBase. InterBase was a good tool with which I never had any issues.
The installation can be done in a minute, while the deployment part takes a few minutes.
We don't have any special team to help with the deployment of the product, so we rely on the Standard support people in our company to install the product, and they do it in about two minutes, after which they install the software and proceed into the training phase, making it an overall easy process.
Firebird SQL is an open-source solution, which means it is a free product.
Zero maintenance is required for the product.
I recommend the product to those planning to use it.
I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.
I use the database for accounting and other records for the bank.
The solution works fine. The documentation is very well written. It has helped me a lot. I've built a small program to manage the condominium I live in. It is being updated by people who seem to be very interested in making it a first-class tool. I've seen it improve over time since I've been using it.
It would be nice to have a graphical user interface to handle the product. A lot of databases have it. I don't think Firebird has it. I use the ISQL directly. It's fine for me. However, it takes a while when you're creating databases and stuff. It would be helpful.
I have been using the solution for five years.
The solution’s stability is very good.
The product’s technical support is very good.
The initial setup was mostly straightforward.
The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is freely available. There has been no cost until now. It is a good investment.
I am using one of the latest versions of the product. It's been a learning experience because I had no experience with another SQL database. What I use the product for is not complicated enough to require more than what the product is already providing. It was very cumbersome to me that they didn't have a Julian field. However, it has been introduced for some time now. It’s the only thing that I could think could have been improved.
I have no experience with the product’s scalability. I've only used it in one machine for one program. I haven't had the need to scale it. If we are using the solution to develop a tool to be used in the cloud, we have to keep in mind that most hosts don't have Firebird accessible. They all use tools like MySQL. It’s a pain because it would be a lot more useful if you could get more hosts to have it.
Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
We use it for ERP solutions and enterprise solutions, like ERP, PLM, Ness, and other kinds of applications.
I use whatever's needed for enterprise applications, like ERP or anything related to data in an enterprise. We also make it for hospitals and for any situation where we need relational information. Firebird is perfect for all of them.
The biggest benefit is being open-source. It gives us great flexibility and usability.
Robustness is the absolutely main feature. However, cryptography isn't Firebird's strongest area. While the latest version has built-in cryptography, we're using version 3, which doesn't. It's a valuable feature in the newer versions.
The main feature I expect is to be able to work with different databases at the same time because that's a wishlist item for me. Part of the wishlist.
I have been using it for 20 years.
It is a stable solution. It's the same as robustness or stability.
Performance depends on configuration. We haven't faced issues even with millions of records. It's all about structure. You can handle it well with the right knowledge of implementing the database and application.
It's scalable. Around ten people are using this solution in the company. But the number can go up to a hundred.
We can increase the further usage.
Firebird can compete with well-known names like Oracle and SQL Server when you don't have more than a few hundred thousand users.
It's a level below SQL Server, and the application of SQL is a kind of database you can rely on for situations where you don't have too much information to deal with.
For example, you can use it for the internet or national projects, but when you have millions of users, then it's not possible for other services.
The setup is absolutely easy. It was very simple.
The deployment is just copying the file. Copying it. Then, the installation i s needed. There's a package that comes with the database to install on the server. On the server, you need the installation.
It's implemented through stock receivables directly from Firebird. Or direct access from Delphi. They would find a program in the language.
It can be done in-house. There is no special team required for deployment or maintenance.
It's open-source and free.
I've tried various ones in the past, like Access, MySQL, Paradox, and more. But they're not used anymore.
Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. Because a few features are missing. Otherwise, it is a ten.
Firebird is good for every company with a hundred users. But not for a thousand end users.
I have built some applications with the solution. I am an end-user in a network environment.
The product was easy to use. We didn’t have any problems with maintenance. We had only one or two problems with the database the whole time, but we could restart it. It didn't need a lot of resources. It performed well.
It is not easy to integrate the tool with Visual Studio.
I have been using the solution since 2000.
The tool is very stable. I faced no problems.
We have 50 users. The tool is scalable enough.
I used a relational database before. When Firebird SQL was released as an open-source solution, I used it because it cost nothing.
The initial setup was very easy. It was straightforward. I used it only in the Windows environment. Changing parameters in the config file was very easy. I also used it with user-defined functions. It was very easy to install. For a single-user application, we had one installation file for the application and another installation file that comes with the product.
The product was stable and had no problems. It saved me a lot of time. I never had to go to the customer to reorganize the database. They regularly backup the files and regenerate the database. They do it every two weeks. The solution saves me 50% more time than the previous product. It has saved me 100% cost.
The tool is open source.
I am evaluating MariaDB. It has better integration with Visual Studio.
The usage of Delphi must be improved. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
I use this product as a zero-administration, embedded database.
I appreciate the fact that, once the database is embedded, it doesn't need to be administered, and removes the requirement for a specific server.
This solution isn't very user-friendly, or intuitive, which could be improved when it is developed.
I have been using this solution for six years.
It is a very stable solution.
The product is scalable, if that is required.
The initial setup of the product is slightly complicated, but once it has been completed the end-user installation is very straightforward, as the deployment is embedded into the product itself.
The solution was implemented using our in-house team.
There is no licensing cost for this solution, as it is open-source.
I would advise any organization implementing this solution, to ensure that the provided documentation is read thoroughly, as the product requires some prior knowledge in order to use it correctly.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
I am using Firebird SQL for creating databases.
I use the solution as a student at school.
The most valuable feature of Firebird SQL is the creation of databases.
The security of the users could improve in Firebird SQL.
I have been using Firebird SQL for approximately one year.
The solution is scalable, I was able to add new users.
The initial setup of Firebird SQL is simple. I downloaded the setup and did the installation and connected the database to the solution.
The implementation of the solution can be done by one person.
I was using the free version of Firebird SQL.
I would recommend this solution to others.
I rate Firebird SQL a seven out of ten.
We use Firebird SQL for resource planning.
I like that we don't have to pay external fees to migrate this data. So, we are looking to relocate from Postgres or EDB.
Technical support and performance could be better. We have some problems with this solution, but we don't know if the problem is with the database or the configuration. For example, sometimes, the users can't access the database.
I have been using Firebird SQL for about three years.
Firebird SQL is a scalable product. We have more than 1,050 users at our organization. You need about five administrators to maintain this database.
Technical support wasn't what we expected. When we called about a problem, they asked us to restart the database.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Firebird SQL a six.
