But I think that two completely different discussions are going on here. Yes MySQL is fast and easy to use. And PostgreSQL has more advanced features, is getting faster, etc. For those applications that need the more 'advanced' features (transactions, stored procedures, rules, etc), you'd better be running (or developing) on the right database! What these articles about corporation X or Y adopting MySQL never tell you is where MySQL is being used and where it isn't. There is a large body of applications for which a simple SQL DB (MySQL) will do, and a smaller number where it simply will not. But for the latter, those advanced features are very, very important.
That is, the worry always is that the less informed take the wrong path (thanks to the type of articles mentioned), and then have to go through the pain and cost working around the problems created. Because entirely wrong comparisons are being made. There will be a market for both databases. (Though I doubt MySQL will be able to add more advanced features now, without serious pissing off their fan base by breaking things.)
On Aug 13, 2004, at 13:03, Begumisa Gerald M wrote:
On Fri, 13 Aug 2004, Noah Sematimba wrote:Searching freshmeat projects section for mysql brings up so many apps that use it that it naturally makes it the better choice for me. Of course I don't put it up there with RDBMS like oracle however given a choice between MySQL,PostgreSQL and MSSQL I would chose MySQL but YMMV :-)
Actually I do see this similar to the classic FreeBSD - Linux clash.
FreeBSD was built to be rock solid from the start (all kinds of controls
on the developers, making sure the quality of code was just the right,
having a *very high* level of organization including clear documentation
etc...) as a result its quite a reliable choice (I had over 340 days
straight uptime until someone where we're co-locating the box rebooted it
by mistake).
Whereas, Linux didn't quite start like that though with the latest 2.6
Kernel the two OSs seem to be converging (in security, scalability and
stability). MySQL was built to be lightening fast from the start and the
developers were very arrogant about features (they were reknown for saying
"transactions should be handled in the application code"), it surely was
quite fast but as it becomes a "corporate solution", there is increased
pressure for it to conform thus increasing "standard" features that an
RDBMS should have -- transactional support, prepared statements,
subqueries etc...
In my opinion, the two RDBMS seem to be converging (PostgreSQL becoming faster, MySQL getting more features).
My 500/-. (2c is abit on the 'lesser' side these days).
Gerald.
--------------------------------------------- This service is hosted on the Infocom network http://www.infocom.co.ug
----------------------------- P. A. Bagyenda Digital Solutions P.O.Box 23833 58 Bukoto Str. Kampala, UGANDA
Tel: +256-41-540143 Mob: +256-77-507743 Web: http://www.dsmagic.com -----------------------------
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and may also
be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not
review, use, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this email in
error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and then delete
this email.
--------------------------------------------- This service is hosted on the Infocom network http://www.infocom.co.ug
