Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: | ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a | heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial | support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it | adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot | its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using | it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database | for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with | it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB engine? No. PostgreSQL is an evolution of Prof. Stonebraker's Postgres project, which was derived from Ingres. I find it truly comparable to Oracle, Sybase, Informix, etc. It may be slower, but offers most of the functionality of the big guys. -- --- Pedro José Lobo Perea Tel:+34 91 336 78 19 Centro de Cálculo Fax:+34 91 331 92 29 E.U.I.T. Telecomunicación e-mail: pjl...@euitt.upm.es Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Ctra. de Valencia, Km. 7E-28031 Madrid - España / Spain To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: | ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a | heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial | support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it | adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot | its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using | it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database | for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with | it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB engine? -Dan No. At least I really don't think so. the lineage of postgresql is postgres-postgres95-postgresql Sander There is no love, no good, no happiness and no future - all these are just illusions. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Database holywars?
Greetings, I've taken up a project that will rely very heavily on remote database access. Naturally, the choice as to which database engine to use is a crucial one. I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. Suggestions and comments? Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: Greetings, I've taken up a project that will rely very heavily on remote database access. Naturally, the choice as to which database engine to use is a crucial one. I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. Suggestions and comments? What's more important, flexibility to make changes, or speed? Anything that implements sql has to be far slower, but if you make many changes, you're going to heavily regret choosing a set of C language functions as the base of your DB. +--- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). +--- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
| I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for | the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows | to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between | MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. | | Suggestions and comments? | | What's more important, flexibility to make changes, or speed? Anything | that implements sql has to be far slower, but if you make many changes, | you're going to heavily regret choosing a set of C language functions | as the base of your DB. I think a proper equilibrium between the two would be most desirable, but, if I had to choose one over the other it would definately be speed. The actual structure of the database isn't going to change much, if at all, I would imagine. Assuming it changes once a year, writing a conversion program to read in the old structure and write out the new one doesn't seem quite so horrendous. On the other hand, its a lot more annoying than a simple ALTER .. ADD statement. :-) Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: | I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for | the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows | to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between | MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. | | Suggestions and comments? | | What's more important, flexibility to make changes, or speed? Anything | that implements sql has to be far slower, but if you make many changes, | you're going to heavily regret choosing a set of C language functions | as the base of your DB. I think a proper equilibrium between the two would be most desirable, but, if I had to choose one over the other it would definately be speed. The actual structure of the database isn't going to change much, if at all, I would imagine. Assuming it changes once a year, writing a conversion program to read in the old structure and write out the new one doesn't seem quite so horrendous. On the other hand, its a lot more annoying than a simple ALTER .. ADD statement. :-) It's one step more complicated than that. Moving an sql database from a free implementation to a commercial implementation, while not perfect, isn't all that terrible a thing to do. Moving it from a C language implementation to sql is going to be harsh, because it's a working database, so you can't afford any bugs. The DB implementation is going to be at least an order of magnitude faster (depending on the sql database, maybe 2 orders), but if it's a money oriented thing, do it via sql, not C. If it's machine control thing, often C is better. I have a personal prejudice I'm trying hard to mask, in favor of C language implementations, you should know that while you read this. Notice your client is going to matter vary much here. As an example, if you tell a stockbroker that you've saved him a huge amount of money at an added .001% risk, that stockbroker will fire you, because they don't care about money, they want to have it work, and they don't want to hear about details. Save him *time*, however, and you can count on a huge bonus! +--- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). +--- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: Greetings, I've taken up a project that will rely very heavily on remote database access. Naturally, the choice as to which database engine to use is a crucial one. I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. Suggestions and comments? ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. -- --- Pedro José Lobo Perea Tel:+34 91 336 78 19 Centro de Cálculo Fax:+34 91 331 92 29 E.U.I.T. Telecomunicación e-mail: pjl...@euitt.upm.es Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Ctra. de Valencia, Km. 7E-28031 Madrid - España / Spain To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Pedro J. Lobo wrote: On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: Greetings, I've taken up a project that will rely very heavily on remote database access. Naturally, the choice as to which database engine to use is a crucial one. I'd like to stay away from the commercial database suites (i.e. Oracle) for the time being, however I will eventually move to it once the database grows to over 100M records. In the meantime however, I'm debating heavily between MySQL and Berkeley DB with a multi-threaded socket frontend. Suggestions and comments? ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. And it has Java bindings (JDBC). I found Java makes *great* front ends. Postgresql + Java are a fine mixture. +--- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). +--- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
| ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a | heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial | support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it | adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot | its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using | it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database | for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with | it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB engine? -Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: | ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a | heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial | support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it | adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot | its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using | it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database | for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with | it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB engine? I don't know, but it's irrelevant. The point is, do you use an intervening compatibility layer (sql) for your database, or not. There has to be a low level layer, but if postgresql uses any particular one isn't of any importance here, you understand? It's just figuring the costs, on the one hand, what you gain in speed, on the other hand, what you give up in reconfigurability and portability. You won't find the commercial db having a Berkeley DB interface. If you want that final move to be as painless and bug free as you can make it (if that's of real importance, and you just can't keep the db in C and move it as C code) then you're going to want sql. There isn't any one right answer here. Note your requirements, and see which method meets your goals closest. If you want to argue this further, we should take it offline, it's ceased to be interesting to the list at large. -Dan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message +--- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chu...@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). +--- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Database holywars?
:| ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a :| heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial :| support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it :| adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot :| its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using :| it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database :| for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with :| it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. : :If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB :engine? : :-Dan No, Berkeley DB doesn't have much to do with anything. Postgres or MySql are both good choices. Postgres has many more features but is also much bulkier. MySql is slim and fast, but not feature-rich enough to handle realtime operations on complex or large datasets. If the original poster intends to ultimately upgrade to a commercial database, I would probably use Postgres rather then MySql. -Matt Matthew Dillon dil...@backplane.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
