On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Sasha Pachev <[email protected]> wrote:
> >* This is not meant to incite a flame war, but I would be curious to > > hear what Mr Pachev has to say about this. > > Thus Posgres is more academically correct, while > MySQL will deviated from academic correctness to achieve better > performance and improve user experience. I suppose for a small > business academic correctness is not as important as actually getting > the job done. > > I suppose that's one way to look at it. But it's not the only one. I've used PosgreSQL for several internal projects at a business, but not because it was academically correct. Postgres has for years been much closer to feature parity with Oracle (and maybe other commercial databases). I've used MySQL a lot for web, and especially read-heavy applications. But when I already have code that relies on Oracle features like transactions, triggers, and pl/sql, pg works where MySQL wouldn't. MySQL has added some of those features, but not all of them last time I checked. And I do still have to put a little work into porting pl/sql. But my point is that I've never chosen postgres over mysql for academic reasons. I chose it because it provided solutions that MySQL can't. My biggest postgres database is just over 1 TB, and it does have performance problems because all our DBA's are Oracle guys and won't touch postgres to optimize it. I doesn't help that it's running on 32-bit hardware, either. /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
