Actually mysql has triggers. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Bryan Sant <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Barry Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > Postgres has for years been much closer to feature parity with Oracle > (and > > maybe other commercial databases). I've used MySQL a lot for web, and > > especially read-heavy applications. But when I already have code that > > relies on Oracle features like transactions, triggers, and pl/sql, pg > works > > where MySQL wouldn't. > > I use Postgres for the same reason. Oracle has always been > pre-ordained as the king at the companies I've worked at. So I've > always had to work with Oracle, and over time, I've become used to the > feature set it provides. Postgres provides most of the same features > and is dang near a drop-in replacement for Oracle. That fact > simplifies things for me as a developer. I write my logic once, > knowing that the underlying database (be it Postgres or Oracle) will > work the same. With MySQL, you may have to re-implement some of your > data access logic because certain DB features don't exist. > > That being said, I've worked plenty with MySQL and have nothing bad to > say about it. The features that it does supply are solid, its blazing > fast, and has excellent cross-platform tools. If you don't need > triggers or stored procs, it's just dandy. > > -Bryan > > /* > PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net > Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug > Don't fear the penguin. > */ > /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
