Ralph,
Personal opinion time <grin>

I, personally, would resist this. MySQL is very good. But it does not have
all the features and reliability of DB2. It only recently got ACID support.
Another possibility, with a longer history, is PostgreSQL. But, in all
fairness, I would resist that as well. But it will likely be a trade-off
based on cost.

Just be sure to bring up all the possible scenarios where MySQL could
possibly have a longer outage than DB2. Make sure that nobody is thinking:
"A database system is a database system, no difference!"


--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
UICI Insurance Center
Applications & Solutions Team
+1.817.255.3225

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its' content is
protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete
this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or
distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is
strictly prohibited.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noll, Ralph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 7:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: MySql
>
>
> We are thinking about using MySql for all our production work
> instead of DB2..
>
> any comments, gotcha, or anything else??
>
> thanks
>
> Ralph
>

Reply via email to