two things. 1: db2 is the best for huge volume anything(big blue) 2: unions should not be used in any pgm. it creates way to much overhead with in the sys.( i learned this when my class at WIT tryed unions at the same time and we crashed the S390 Heavy Iron Mainframe)
but if the comparison is what you really want Linux Magazine did a comparison of DBRMS's about a half a year ago. Ted K. --- Adam Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have used MySQL and Postgres. MySQL is alright, though if you > want > "advanced" features such as unions you have to use the "unstable" > release of > MySQL as the current stable release does not offer this. It can be > worked > around.. but it is kind of a pain. Postgres seems much more refined > than > MySQL, very similar though. I haven't tested either in a high volume > environment, but I would go with postgres out of the choice of those > two. > Also, it is very easy to develop applications that integrate with > either > of these. I am sure it is the same with the other dbs, but just > thought I > would mention that. > Adam Johnson > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Matthew K. Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 11:35 PM > Subject: [sclug-general] SQL Database Servers? > > > Does anyone know a good website that lists the pros & cons of the > different > database servers? Ideally, I am looking for a site which compares > features, > reliability, speed, and cost of Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, > Postgres, > Oracle, and possibly Sybase. > > Any experience and/or recommendations would also be welcome. > > Thanks, > > Matthew Lee > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (507) 532-2488 > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
