> yeah, i realized that as well after i clicked on the "send button" for > my previous post. still, i would think that on low end hardware, mysql > would run circles around oracle on basic sql functions (which compose > most of our app).
In the EWeek RDBMS shootout where Oracle and MySQL came out the winners, they used more complex queries which would leave the MyISAM handler gasping. However, I've seen benchmarks where InnoDB outperforms MyISAM noticeably even on the simplest selects and inserts. This seems to leave only one remaining (but important) advantage of MyISAM tables over InnoDB - the simpler setup and maintenance (i.e. "xcopy" backup). Incidentally, I find Interbase/Firebird to be very interesting. I see people on newsgroups and mailing lists casually mention running databases in the size of tens of GB on it. It has the _footprint of MySQL_ (~10MB exe) with the full-fledged SQL capabilities (views, stored procedures, triggers, multi-versioning concurrency, etc...) of PostgreSQL! > php.net commentaries and other web sites however insist that pconnect is > an absolute must on oracle databases. Yeah, according to everyone, it takes forever to set up a connection to an oracle database. Must be the price you pay for all the security checks. > interesting to note that under freebsd 4.5, our application lagged > behind linux by around 10 tps, using the same hardware and > apache-php-phpa versions. we were using a dual p3-1.2, with 2GB of RAM. Linux sounds like it's catching up fast with BSD in terms of suitability for servers. The only area I can think of where *BSD still has an undisputed lead is security. _ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
