On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Barry Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
I use Postgres for the same reason. Oracle has always been pre-ordained as the king at the companies I've worked at. So I've always had to work with Oracle, and over time, I've become used to the feature set it provides. Postgres provides most of the same features and is dang near a drop-in replacement for Oracle. That fact simplifies things for me as a developer. I write my logic once, knowing that the underlying database (be it Postgres or Oracle) will work the same. With MySQL, you may have to re-implement some of your data access logic because certain DB features don't exist. That being said, I've worked plenty with MySQL and have nothing bad to say about it. The features that it does supply are solid, its blazing fast, and has excellent cross-platform tools. If you don't need triggers or stored procs, it's just dandy. -Bryan /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
