Tim Cook schreef: > On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 19:25 +0100, Gerard Freriks wrote: > >> Why? >> >> >> (Not that I intend to do that) >> >> > > >> On Nov 5, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Tim Cook wrote: >> >> >>> (please do NOT use MySQL for healthcare >>> information) >>> > > > I will "assume" that your WHY? question was in response to this > statement I made? > > In general (and for the speed results MySQL claims) it trades off ACID > qualities to attain them. There are **MANY** documents available on the > Internet to adjudge the differences between the needs of a high speed > blog service etc, and the needs of a real DBMS with ACID integrity and > MVCC. > This old news, it depends on many parameters how MySQL behaves. You can use the InnoDB table format which acts 100% according to ACID-specs. Not that I would advise MySQL, but I would not advise against it for the reason you gave, because that is not valid anymore, since version 5.x. InnoDB is supported by MySQL since 2001.
It is a good DBMS, in fact, it uses SAP-technology (read this, from 2003: http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/05/27/HNmysql_1.html) Oracle has taken a license on the InnoDB format because it is very good, yes, it is the same format which you can use in MySQL (just one line in the configuration-file) http://sql-info.de/mysql/oracle-acquires-innodb.html > There are many benchmarks ( I have no interest in either system ) that > show that large scale SMP systems perform better with PostgreSQL vs. > MySQl. IMHO, you should use an OODBMS for most installations anyway. I > It is a good idea, but there are also downsides on this. - it is not really necessary, because there are very good ways to map from objects to relational databases. Read the papers from Scot W. Ambler on this. - it limits your choice of vendors - it limits your choice of programming languages, OS-platforms - it makes your software less transparant to vendor idnependency - OORDMS's are much more expensive - they are less mature And to map the RM-objects to a relational database it is really suffcient to use ANSI 1992 SQL, which means that your SQL-code is not vendor-specific. regards Bert Verhees
