Matt Robertson wrote: > > I've always thought of mySQL as an upscale Access that's the next > logical step when your traffic overburdens the weak Access engine but > your budget or needs aren't in league with a true grownup solution. > This sort of malarkey reinforces that.
I think MySQL is very different in nature from Access and it should probably not be compared with any rdbms at all because of its different nature. With any rdbms I know, the focus is on the correctness of the data and the vendors will sacrifice speed for that. With MySQL, the focus is on speed, and the vendor will sacrifice correctness of the data for that. It is hard to overestimate the importance of that difference. Jochem ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
