On Saturday 29 January 2005 07:21, Arjen Lentz wrote: > Leif B. Kristensen <leif <at> solumslekt.org> writes: > > emerge postgresql -- it's got both transactions and foreign keys > > right out of the box. As well as data checking, cursors, views, > > stored procedures, and lots of other goodies. > > > > MySQL is ok for data presentation on a Web site, as it's quick and > > stable. But if you want transactions and foreign keys, you really > > need a whole lot more than what MySQL is capable of delivering. > > It saddens me that that you feel the need to go religious in a > perfectly sensible discussion about MySQL.
It's not about religion -- it's about reality. > Your presentation of things is both limited and incorrect. I don't > know what you aim to accomplish by pretending that MySQL is not > capable of doing the big jobs that many companies rely on MySQL for > on a daily basis, your story just doesn't jive with reality. I have been using MySQL for three years, and have been developing a genealogy presentation database for my own website in MySQL & PHP, so I actually feel that I know the product quite well, thank you. And like I said, I won't hesitate to recommend it for such simple tasks. I've also tried to develop some registration routines for this software using MySQL, but over time I have come to the conclusion that MySQL is a bad choice of tool for that kind of job. A RDBMS that silently drops or truncates a value that doesn't fit in a particular field isn't my idea of reliability. Simply said; I don't see why I should have to reinvent the wheel in software to do simple data checking for MySQL, while other RDBMSes do this perfectly well on their own. That's just only one of the issues I've got with MySQL. There are others as well, but suffice it for now to say that I consider it simplistic, as RDBMSes go. At work, I'm using Oracle and DB2. And in my private life, PostgreSQL is a recent and delightful encounter. > People and companies choose their database based on needs as well as > preference. Many companies use multiple different RDBMS (traditional > as well as opensource) for exactly that reason. So do I. And I've already mentioned my own MySQL web application; I don't see any reason whatsoever to quit using MySQL there. If you want to serve up thousands of Selects in a few seconds, MySQL is a perfect choice. But it's not the perfect tool for everything. > I'm sure you can promote PostgreSQL perfectly well without saying > anything negative about MySQL or any other product. Say something > positive, and promote the software of your choice on its own merit. > Then let people make their own choice. Isn't that the way it should > be? I don't think that you read my original posting at all. You just saw something that might be construed as criticism of MySQL. As you mentioned religion in your first paragraph: If I were a Community Relations Manager, I'd be more worried about all the database novices advocating MySQL all over the Internet like it's the Second Coming. -- Leif Biberg Kristensen http://solumslekt.org/ -- [email protected] mailing list
