There are lots of stats available online about this sort of thing; the summary is that MySQL does hold up a bit better under heavy traffic and has faster read times (in most studies anyway) when compared with SQL Server.
That being said, either database is going to be FAR superior to Access, and both are excellent choices. SQL Server is certainly easier to deal with from an administration standpoint and does have some niceties that MySQL lacks, but if you're having to pay for a license for SQL Server vs. getting MySQL for free, and you're not afraid of doing a bit extra work and learn the tools, MySQL is a great choice. PostgreSQL is another great open source database that has a few more features than MySQL, so you might want to check that one out as well. Matt On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:29:19 -0700, Colin Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone have specifics about the best database to use for cold fusion.. > Currently our site uses access as the database but I could set up SQL2000 - > one of the guys at the company would rather use mysql... > > So of these - for fast response with lots of requests per minute.... > Basically in a read only situation... Which database would be our best. > > All three are available options. > > Colin > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe: > http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberUnsubscribe.cfm > To subscribe: > http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberRegistration.cfm > > -- Matt Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mattwoodward.com ---------------------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberUnsubscribe.cfm To subscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org/form_MemberRegistration.cfm
