On June 15, 2005 12:40 pm, Shawn wrote: > On Wednesday 15 June 2005 12:23, William Astle wrote: > > And, finally, one last data point. Most sites don't come anywhere near > > requiring the advanced features of any dbms. For the vast majority of > > sites, any dbms will do the job. Mysql, postgres, sybase, etc., will all > > work sufficiently for most sites. As a result, there's no compelling > > technological reason (for *most* sites) to choose one over the other. > > Thus, the preponderance of documentation and examples wins out. > > I agree with William's point here. However, if I used MySQL to develop web > applications (real apps, not just web sites), I'd probably be out of > business. Simply because I would need to move most of the data management > logic into presentation layer code. With a SQL standards compliant > database that supports triggers and stored procedures, a great deal of data > management can happen AT THE DATABASE where it belongs, and minimizes the > amount of code that needs to be written, and promotes code re-use (so I > don't have to write the same logic over and over...). > MySQL still is not adding (correct me if I am wrong) nested queries, union and intersection and if you need on of these features its really mind bending to get what you want with ordinary selects. In particular, if you need to perform 2 queries to the the result of one of the above then the functionality is just not the same. Between the queries there is the possibility of that data changing and now all bets are off.
_______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
