Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

MySQL Database Design and Optimization

Posted by timothy on Thu Dec 02, 2004 05:14 PM
from the stick-this-in-there dept.
norburym (Mary Norbury-Glaser) writes "As the title suggests, Beginning MySQL Database Design and Optimization is intended for the range of users between novice and professional. It may seem difficult for one book to suit such a wide readership without losing readers on either end of the spectrum, or perhaps without providing adequate coverage to any particular audience, Apress has done what many other publishers have failed to do by providing an excellent series of 'novice to professional' books. An example of their dedication to detail and perfection is the inclusion of top-notch technical reviewers (Mike Hillyer, in this case, often found haunting Experts Exchange as one of the top MySQL experts) who provide expertise to the series. Authors Jon Stephens and Chad Russell have extensive combined PHP and MySQL experience that shows in the content of this volume. Readers with some MySQL experience who desire a broader range of instruction will gain much from this book. Experienced users will find quite a lot of valuable information that will extend their existing knowledge base. Concepts in design are better learned from the beginning to avoid repeating poor programming mistakes, but it's never too late to learn good practices." Read on for the rest of Norbury-Glaser's review.

This book focuses on MySQL 4.0/4.1 but also gives consideration to v.3.23 users as well as a nod toward v.5. The layout of each chapter gives a description of the topic of the chapter, followed by the meat of the chapter, a summary and what's next (how the context of this chapter ties into the subject of the next). There are numerous "notes", cautionary flags, tips, screen shots, code examples as well as thoughts from each author that provide explanatory asides to the content. The authors also provide references to other volumes, as needed.

A glance through the table of contents will give the reader a precise overview of what to expect in this book: Review of MySQL Basics; MySQL Column and Table Types; Keys, Indexes and Normalization; Optimizing Queries With Operators, Branching and Functions; Joins, Temporary Tables and Transactions; Finding the Bottlenecks, MySQL Programming; and Looking Ahead.

Chapter 1: Review of MySQL Basics gives a very quick (under 50 pages) summary of how to connect to the MySQL server; MySQL's identifiers and naming conventions for databases, tables and columns; a review of MySQL's syntax, writing basic queries and using basic commands (create, drop, select, insert, update, delete); and a discussion of the use of table, column and expression aliases. This section, while adequate, is clearly intended as an analysis of core information necessary to proceed to further chapters.

Chapter 2 follows with MySQL Column and Table Types, which deal with datatypes and structures used to store the data. The goal here is to help the reader design effective tables (and therefore create a well-designed and efficient database) suited to the particular type of data at hand. Numeric types are covered in depth; strings, the null value, ENUM and SET are also addressed as well as common "gotchas" and developer errors.

Keys, Indexes and Normalization come naturally in Chapter 3, with optimal data handling the goal: the chapter addresses getting data in efficiently and getting the results out efficiently, eliminating redundant data, appropriate uses of indexes and common index creation errors.

The core of the book is clearly Chapter 4, "Optimizing Queries with Operators, Branching, and Functions." Here, optimization skills are honed; manipulation and filtering of data is one of MySQL's strengths and this chapter shows the reader how to replace less-than-ideal program logic with SQL constructs to precisely adjust query performance. There's a good demonstration here of outputting a list of member data to a web page. The ultimate goal in this chapter is to provide the reader good skills that translate into better efficiency and faster database interaction. As the authors point out, one obvious logical consequence of this is easier migration between platforms and programming languages.

The next reasonable step is to look at additional features that MySQL has up its sleeve that will save the developer time and effort in the overall scheme of application development. Chapter 5, "Joins, Temporary Tables, and Transactions" discusses three of these additional features. The authors carefully point out that each of these eliminate excess queries needed to pull data, decrease code overhead, minimize the need to store data as application logic, decrease the number of bugs that appear in code and help guarantee data integrity (an aspect of database design that unfortunately often takes a back seat to other priorities as developers are often not concerned with the validity of data in a real world sense; i.e. from the user's perspective).

Chapter 6, "Finding the Bottlenecks," addresses modifying system configuration variables outside of the default and how these can dramatically affect performance. The authors look at some available free tools that help monitor server performance and enable configuration changes including mytop, WinMySqlAdmin, phpMyAdmin and the new MySQL Administrator (available from MySQL AB). MySQL caching capabilities and the ability to decrease repetitious read/writes to disk (good table, key and query caching within MySQL) are discussed. Finally, database interoperability and abstraction layers are mentioned in terms of performance penalties vs. making life easier for the programmer.

MySQL Programming is the topic of Chapter 7, where a very good discussion of the MySQL API is provided. There are a lot of useful examples in this chapter covering many of the common MySQL APIs available (PHP's MySQL and MySQLi, Pythons's MySQLdb, ODBC, Perl's DBI), along with feature discussions and examples.

The final chapter, "Looking Ahead," examines MySQL v.4.1, 5.0 and 5.1 and some eagerly awaited new features, including stored procedures, stored functions, views and triggers.

This is a well-rounded volume on MySQL design. There are excellent examples and the flow of the text is conversational without being rambling and unstructured. The authors have obviously taken great pains to minimize tangents and extraneous information; pithy, but with sufficient detail in mind. The reader is left with neither the sense of being overwhelmed nor longing for an explanation for a glossed-over topic. This book is pretty much a "must have" for a MySQL programmer looking to bridge the gap between novice and professional.


You can purchase Beginning MySQL Database Design and Optimization from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by tcopeland (32225) * <tom&infoether,com> on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:18PM (#10979513) Homepage
    ...SQL Performance Tuning [ocelot.ca] is an excellent book. It has a lot of good discussion on when to use certain SQL contructs and how to check your database to ensure you're actually getting improvements.

    PLUG: Which SQL queries are taking the most time? PQA home page [postgresql.org], download [pgfoundry.org].
  • common gotchas (Score:4, Informative)

    by RelliK (4466) on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:26PM (#10979584)
    right here [sql-info.de]
    • Re:common gotchas (Score:2, Insightful)

      by ajs (35943)
      That is NOT a list of "common gotchas" (the misleading name of the page aside), it's an anti-MySQL rant that has lived on far too long.

      Please, can we for once have a post about a piece of software on Slashdot without the pro-X or anti-Y folks flocking to it to bash or praise it? Can we just for once talk about the damn book?
      • by kfg (145172)
        Can we just for once talk about the damn book?

        You're ne. . ., well, no, I see you're not.

        In that case the only question I'm left with is:

        Come on, you know better than that, don't you?

        KFG
      • uhhh, what? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by RelliK (4466) on Thursday December 02 2004, @06:02PM (#10979940)
        How is this a rant? Are you saying the problems they list don't exist?

        I like that site cause it contains no spin: it just lists the facts and provides references to the documentation. Is it the facts that bother you?
        • "How is this a rant? Are you saying the problems they list don't exist?"

          Not at all. What I'm saying is that it's a page that was meant to discredit MySQL by putting together a sort of reverse-FAQ. Instead of saying, "people run into X, well here's what they do when they run into that," it's just a diatribe about how lacking someone thinks MySQL is. That, as they say, ain't news, and it most CERTAINLY does not deserve a fresh link from every MySQL article to hit Slashdot.
          • Re:uhhh, what? (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Bob Uhl (30977)
            ...it most CERTAINLY does not deserve a fresh link from every MySQL article to hit Slashdot.

            I'm not so certain. A lot of folks think that MySQL is a good idea; it seems to me that it is in almost every case a mistake, and so posting such things helps ensure that this is well-known. Much like linking to GNU/Linux resources when an article concerns Windows.

            FWIW, I've used both PostgreSQL and MySQL.

              • Re:uhhh, what? (Score:3, Insightful)

                by kpharmer (452893) *
                > It's software that does what you tell it to do.

                Actually, no.

                The point of the many of the 'gotchas' is that this software behaves erractically: rather than produce an exception during an overflow or conversion error, for example, it just silently modifies the data and returns no warning to the user.

                The truly bizarre thing about this set of errors is that it is about the only database management software you'll find that is so guilty of this behavior. You'd never accept that behavior from SQL Server,
                  • Re:uhhh, what? (Score:3, Insightful)

                    by kpharmer (452893) *
                    > A well documented convinience for applications
                    > which always behaves the same way.

                    Pardon? So when MySQL fails to report of an exception (incorrect date, string overflow, etc, etc, etc) - that's intentional? It wasn't sloppiness or incompetence? So, should the other database vendors start eliminating exception handling as well - perhaps in the interest of keeping the product easy to use?

                    On the other hand, maybe you need to get a little emotional distance from the product.

                    > Please explain you
          • Not at all. What I'm saying is that it's a page that was meant to discredit MySQL by putting together a sort of reverse-FAQ.
            Given the author has a page for PostgreSQL as well (albeit a short one), I'd suggest you're full of shit.

            it's just a diatribe about how lacking someone thinks MySQL is.
            Since when is pointing out things that a piece of software does incorrectly, especially when it claims to do them correctly and noting the relevant examples and documentation to do that, a diatribe?

            That, as they

        • by Bingo Foo (179380) on Thursday December 02 2004, @06:32PM (#10980361)
          Also, as a general comment about the closing sentence of your post, have you considered that some pieces of software might be better than others? Or one piece of software might adhere more closely to a standard than another? These are all topics worth discussion.

          How true. For instance, emacs is a much better piece of software than vi.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:39PM (#10979698)
    The RFDs (Request for Discussions) for both PostgreSQL and MySQL are on news.group. In about one month, both groups will be voted on, if it passes, the groups will be found under comp.databases.*.

    If you want more information, visit news.groups with your usenet server.

    Right now, there aren't ANY postgresql or mysql groups under the big 8 comp. domain.

    Remember to stay tuned for the CFV so they get voted into the domain! Here is a nice web poll you can take to voice your support of the groups getting into the big 8 usenet hierarchy:

    http://scripts.postgresql.org/survey.php?View=1& Su rveyID=36

    Vote yes, so they know there is support for a big 8 comp.databases.postgresql newsgroup as one does not exist yet!
    • I just checked it out on my usenet server, and it is true. There are NO MySQL and Postgresql groups in the comp.databases.* hierarchy on usenet.

      I would recommend anyone who uses these databases to stay tuned to news.groups and find out how to vote for the creation of these groups on usenet. The result would be the creation of the following groups:

      comp.databases.mysql
      comp.databases.postgresql
  • UK People (Score:4, Informative)

    by RobertTaylor (444958) <roberttaylor1234 AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:42PM (#10979730) Homepage Journal
    If you are in the UK you can get the book here [greatdeal.co.uk] for 10% off and free delivery up to Dec 25th :)

    A few are floating around for £20 as well.
  • MySQL for beginners? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by owlstead (636356) on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:54PM (#10979858)
    Don't you want to start with just database design and SQL before you would want to move to a book about a specific RDBC implementation? If it is just about database design then the title of the book is wrong.

    Then again, if you wish to explain about setting up the database itself, access rights and so on, then the book might be for beginners. Once again, the title would not fit the book.

    As anyone should know, the steps in software development are: get it working, get it right, get it optimized. Let's hope that the book does not go to deep into the optimized part in a too early stage.
  • I've been doing the PHP/SQL thing for money for a while now, and I've been able to meet all my needs so far. I've taken a peek at Postgres, but I haven't found a good explanation and usage examples for some of the features that mysql lacks. I understand nested queries, transactions, and foreign keys, however I haven't found anything that helps me understand stored procedures, views, or triggers.
      • This might be the answer to one problem that has been particularly vexing to me:

        One project of mine involved a supplier quoting system. Supplier were to log on to view new RFQs, quote on them, and see if their quote got accepting. The quote table had a supplier_id field, of course, to indicate what suppliers had quoted. What made me very nervous was that simple integer that prevented suppliers from seeing each others' quotes -- they were in competition with each other, and we had no doubt that they would d

  • What would be nice is a book review (and book) showing developers the best practices to PHP and Pear DB development so that PHP programmers can create apps that are SQL database agnostic -- i.e. can have a MySQL or PostgreSQL backend without much code change in PHP. A mere change in the PHP line telling it what server, where, and login will only be required. I'm sure this book is probably already written, anyone care to point me where?

  • Database design? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tablizer (95088) on Thursday December 02 2004, @09:05PM (#10981797) Homepage Journal
    Database design should be a generic RDBMS book for the most part. It does not make much sense to repeat table design techniques and philosophy for each RDBMS product. (However, giving vendor-specific tips and limits is understandable.) It might be cheaper to purchase and write a generic book about table design because it can be written and printed for multiple products. Then again, many publishers simply copy-and-paste semi-generic topics with slight custom tuning.
  • by gtoomey (528943) on Thursday December 02 2004, @09:17PM (#10981901)
    I'm using 4.1 (its not a production release yet) which has subqueries, proper joins, and unions. Its the first version which is even remotely acceptable. Coding without subqueries is very frustrating

    Views, synonyms and referential integrity (foreign key constraints) would be very nice too.

    When I find out why VHS became more popular than technically superior Betamax, I'll figure out why Mysql is more popular than Postgres.

    • I'm using 4.1 (its not a production release yet)...
      MySQL 4.1 series marked as stable [slashdot.org]
    • Coding without subqueries teaches you a lot about SQL.

      Seriously, before reading stuff about how to get around not having subqueries, I was writing much less efficient SQL code.

      Now, I rarely ever need subqueries even though they're available -- I've learned to optimize many of them into joins, or pre-query the information I want seperately since I'll usually reuse it several times elsewhere.
      • Also, if you consider an application where data is only ever input through the web or some other front-end GUI, foreign key contrains aren't necessarily needed (I'll admit they're still good to have and use), because you can control the input through restricted UI elements like drop-downs, radio buttons, etc.

        I know a lot of people do that (myself guilty on occasion), but you're the first person to publicly admit it :)

        Constraints are very important.

        First, in the app, you check the input for basic securit
  • by Zontar The Mindless (9002) <jon AT hiveminds DOT net> on Friday December 03 2004, @05:44AM (#10984358) Homepage
    Hi, I'm one of the authors of the book.

    1. Thanks to Mary for the positive review.

    2. Thanks to Mike Hillyer for his invaluable help with the book. Say what you like about Visual Basic (I happen to loathe it, myself), Mike's an excellent programmer, and his knowledge of MySQL is superb. In fact, part of the way through the process of writing this book, he was hired by MySQL AB to work with the teams developing the Connectors and the new GUI tools. His site VBMySQL.com provides a valuable and unique resource for VB and other Windows developers wanting to build DB applications who'd like to use an actual database instead of Access and don't feel like condemning themselves or their users to paying for SQL Server. Rather than flame him for his language and platform choices, you should commend him for introducing many Windows programmers to an Open Source technology. (BTW, you might be interested in knowing that he also uses Linux and programs in C++ as well.) It was a privilege to have him work on the book with us, and it's a privilege to work with him now at MySQL AB. And he's a damn good writer.

    3. We wrote the book because there's a lot of MySQL installations out there, and a lot of very badly done MySQL databases. Granted, there are some things that MySQl isn't (yet). But it is fast and stable -- or can be. And it's certainly possible to throw those advantages away through poor DB and application design by people who don't know the difference between a database and a spreadsheet or who don't know how to leverage SQL to do their heavy lifting for them. We chose not to spend a great deal of time with enforcing foreign keys because a great many administrators are still running MySQL 3.23 and don't bother to make InnoDB available. Besides, if you expect people to understand key constraints, you have to get them to normalise first, and many devs don't even do that.

    4. We wanted to encourage PHP developers to make the transition to ext/mysqli as soon as possible.

    5. I don't know what other people may have experienced with Apress, but they've been damned nice to me, and I can tell you that Gary Cornell does answer his email, even when it comes from a lowly writer who's not yet even signed a contract. Speaking of which -- their contracts are much better than Wrox' or Wiley's. And since I've been associated with them, they've dumped at least one bad editor and another one that I'd heard some not-so-favourable things about.

    6. While we didn't cover this in the book, fans of Postgres might wish to take note: We already have a working Cluster implementation, and we're anxious to see what yours will look like. :)
      • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:4, Insightful)

        by temojen (678985) on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:31PM (#10979622) Journal
        3) It's probably already available at your hosting provider, whereas Postgresql probably isn't (vicious cycle with #1)
      • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:4, Interesting)

        by jarich (733129) on Thursday December 02 2004, @05:33PM (#10979642) Homepage Journal
        Then you see those sites with mysql query errors when under heavy load or whichever silly programming mistakes.

        Wow! So I guess other databases don't get Slashdotted? That's impressive! (note sarcasm).

        MySQL is popular because its easy

        You say that like it's a bad thing... is something better if it's difficult to use?

        And as an aside, I worked at a biotech. We had an 80 gig database with a quarter billion entries. We were running platform neutral SQL and used MySql, Oracle and MS-Sql server.

        We ditched the "commercial grade" databases because they were to slow! MySql did a great job under enormous load.

        • I'm getting off on a tangent here, but:

          Then you see those sites with mysql query errors when under heavy load or whichever silly programming mistakes.

          Wow! So I guess other databases don't get Slashdotted? That's impressive! (note sarcasm).

          I don't think the grandparent is trolling MySQL's ability to handle heavy loads but rather its tendency to attract n00bs.

          You should disable display of PHP errors on production web sites, for instance ("php.ini" even tells you to), and use the server's error log

            • Its a troll :)

              I'm not a fan of MySQL tho. Yes, it is fast... As long as you are only querying data.

              If you have multiple users updating data, MySQL isn't such a good option.

              • It could of been a troll... I just assumed it was someone who worked with really big databases all the time and thinks his world is everyone's world.

                In my example, we saw the same speed difference with database creation (which had lots of reads and maybe 10% writes) and also when we used the database in our application, which was all reads.

                I haven't really tried Postgres though, so I can't speak to it... I've got to play with sometime and see if it grabs me.

      • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:2, Insightful)

        by dfetter (2035)
        MySQL is not easy. Need a subquery? You're out of luck, pal. A FULL JOIN? Sorry. Check constraints? No dice. Throw an error instead of taking a bad guess when you've fatfingered an input? Oops. And God help you if you need some trigger logic for auditing purposes, because MySQL AB certainly won't.
        • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Interesting)

          by 0racle (667029)
          Need a subquery
          Not everyone does

          FULL JOIN
          Again, not everyone does

          Check constraints
          Still don't, or the application can

          trigger logic
          You know what I'm seeing a pattern here. I guess it seems that while MySQL doesn't do everything you want, it does enough of what other people want so it would seem that at least to other people, MySQL does not suck.

          As far as not throwing errors, we've either used different versions, or your talking about something I haven't come across, since I've seen MySQL throw pl
          • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Interesting)

            by The Snowman (116231) *

            First of all, I like and use MySQL. I have it running on two public web sites and I use at home for my intranet. It is fast, easy to use, and works well for my purposes. It may not be perfect, but I think it is good. Anyway, on with the reply:

            Constraints, triggers, and stored procedures are important to have in a database. While I can make up for MySQL's shortcomings in application code, this is not a good idea. I should not have to validate data in the application. If I could put that code in the database

            • for enterprise-class databases
              Then don't use MySQL there, and that was my point. There's no shortage of DB products to use, so use the right tool for the job. I never said no one needed stored procedures, triggers or subqueries, I said some people don't need them. Every time a MySQL story comes up, people act like its the only DB around and they're forced to use it.

              SAP seems to disagree that MySQL has no place as an enterprise database though.
          • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:2, Interesting)

            by dfetter (2035)
            > > Need a subquery
            > Not everyone does

            but when you do, you are Sh^Hadly Out of Luck.

            > > FULL JOIN
            > Again, not everyone does

            see above.

            > > Check constraints
            > Still don't, or the application can

            I hope you'll pardon my putting this so bluntly, but this is an absolutely classical n00b mistake. In my experience, a useful data store doesn't have "the" application or "the" interface. It has several to start with and eventually grows many of them. That is why the data store itself
        • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Informative)

          by chochos (700687)
          Don't forget stored procedures. MySQL doesn't support them (I think the new version is going to, though). On PostgreSQL you have their own SP language or you can write the procedures in C... also, I think transaction support is not as good in MySQL as in other databases, but I don't know for sure.
          Oh, and sequences. MySQL has the auto increment property for a field, but doesn't have sequences that can be independent of a table.
      • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Insightful)

        by ptlis (772434)
        Here's an old adage for you: Every tool has a job, and there's a job for every tool.

        mySQL may not be appropriate in a mission-critical situation, but that does not make it bad for all situations; if you need speed in prescedence of everything else then mySQL is probably the right tool for the job. If you need data integrity, ACID compliance etc then PostgrSQL, Oracle etc are the right tool for the job.

        Outright saying one or the other is a POS only makes you look stupud.

        • I have started a company and am in the process of putting my precious mission critical data in a MySQL database. RAID 1 is used to prevent loss of data, and apart from that DVDs will be burnt using the superdrive.

          My database app is low volume data traffic to/from the db.

          Can anyone tell me where MySQL fails when it comes to mission critical stuff? I'm very eager to find out.

          Bert
          • The lack of referential integrity means you cannot guarantee the state of the data in the database, unless you run a whole bunch of queries to check.

            If there is only one way to get data in, through one application that can enforce the integrity on entry, and check it on retrieval, you may be OK. As long as you know nobody will ever be updating it directly in the database.

      • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Informative)

        by ShieldW0lf (601553)
        MySQL is popular because it is known and because every $20 a month web hosting service supports it. Period. It's not any easier than other databases... the fact that MySQL supports a limited subset of SQL and only allows you to use the basics doesn't mean that more powerful databases don't also let you use the basics.

        At least they finally added support for subqueries. That was always the nail in their coffin as far as I was concerned.

        • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Michalson (638911)
          Then why not use PostgreSQL? For companies it's cheaper (MySQL licence for commercial use is almost as much as the basic Windows 2003 Server Licence), and for open source lovers it's even more free.

          And that of course ignores the fact that it's also technically superior - faster, proper data integrity, and real SQL (sorry, but for an SQL programmer, the kiddie pool syntax available in MySQL is The show stopper)

          MySQL is the very thing open source is supposed to be against - software being used just because
          • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:2, Interesting)

            by archen (447353)
            1) I don't think you're required to buy a MySQL licence unless you need other licence requirements or support from the company.

            2) You have any proof that Postgres is faster than mysql? Everything I've seen indicates that mysql is still *slightly* faster than postgres. Most of the systems I've worked with I haven't seen much of a difference. Personally I only use Postgresql for everything, but on other systems mysql seems to be about the same.
            • Re:MySQL sucks (Score:3, Informative)

              by Lenolium (110977)
              A reply to #1 (because I have no idea what #2 is really like, I've heard stories both ways)

              MySQL with the release of version 4.0 changed the licence of it's libraries from LGPL (commercial code can link to these libraries) to GPL (commercial code cannot link to these libraries, anything that does becomes GPL). Any program you write that uses the mysql libraries is considered a derivative work by the GPL. So unless you write your own mysql libraries (to the undocumented wire-protocol of mysql 4.0), you have
    • I'm of mixed feelings on that. I have the obligatory bookshelf dedicated to books with woodcuts on the cover, but I'm not happy with some of the ones I've gotten recently (I won't say "recent ones" since I think the Postfix book, at least, isn't all that recent). The New Riders books I have (both Paul duBois, I believe) I'm pretty happy with.

      I'd not trust Apress until I hear the whole story on this [simon-cozens.org] issue [simon-cozens.org] and see how it settles out, though. Probably fine, but...
    • Re:FireBird Rocks (Score:3, Informative)

      Why do people keep saying MySQL doesn't have transactions or subqueries? For heaven's sake, please update your 4-year-old facts!

      Oh, and PostgreSQL is actually better for ANSI SQL compliance. It's one of the most SQL-standard compliant database I've ever seen (certainly more standard than Firebird). Call me when Firebird has TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE datatype.