I have a book devoted to PostgresSQL at home. When I come home, I'll
post the information.
O'Reilly has Practical Postgresql, the full text of which is also available
online: http://www.commandprompt.com/ppbook/
I know there are a couple of others floating around as well.
But you're
for different Operating Systems, is this true? Is it true with UDB?
From: Mladen Gogala [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/19 Mon PM 11:04:26 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Oracle vs Mysql
It needs not to have the same capabilities, it needs to have
Well, PostGreSql has all of those features, but handling 100GB? Not sure not sure
I'd trust it that far.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 2:10 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
I think he is talking
AMEN!!
Dick GouletSenior Oracle DBAOracle Certified 8i
DBA
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 8:42
PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:
Oracle vs MysqlIf MySQL
comes to have the same
Title: Message
Most
people only use a fraction of Oracle's featuresand some are deceived
bythe Oracle Marketeerswho tell themthatthey NEED them
all. Maybe the 80/20 rule also applies to technology purchases... Especially
when the cost differential is huge.
My 4X4
pickup works just fine
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: Oracle vs Mysql
Sounds like the old Oracle vs. Ingress battles. Oracle won because it was
better at marketing. All detailed in the book The Difference Between God
and Larry Ellison. I can see
On 01/20/2004 09:19:44 AM, Goulet, Dick wrote:
Well, PostGreSql has all of those features, but handling 100GB? Not
sure not sure I'd trust it that far.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
Given the price, I believe that some testing would be warranted, don't
you think?
--
Inprocess actually.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 10:54 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
On 01/20/2004 09:19:44 AM, Goulet, Dick wrote:
Well, PostGreSql has all of those features, but handling 100GB?
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, eric king wrote:
I think he is talking about 100GB database. Can PostgreSQL and MySQL handle
that size? We used MySQL in some of the web projects, but it just stores
small set of operational data and later on those data are moved to Oracle as
a permenant store. For small
Back to MySQL and whether Postgres is the way to go,
I can recall editorials debating whether Unix/Oracle would ever be
industrial strength enough to support critical applications.
The point the book The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison tries to
make is that the technically superior
Huh???!?? What did you search for? I get many hits searching for
postgresql.
Rich
Rich JesseSystem/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 12:29 PM
To:
On 01/20/2004 01:29:25 PM, DENNIS WILLIAMS wrote:
Back to MySQL and whether Postgres is the way to go,
I can recall editorials debating whether Unix/Oracle would ever be
industrial strength enough to support critical applications.
The point the book The Difference Between God and Larry Ellison
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Mladen Gogala wrote:
I have a book devoted to PostgresSQL at home. When I come home, I'll
post the information.
O'Reilly has Practical Postgresql, the full text of which is also available online:
http://www.commandprompt.com/ppbook/
I know there are a couple of others
Hence why Sql*Server is out there.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:29 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Back to MySQL and whether Postgres is the way to go,
I can recall editorials debating whether
Rich
Amazon - Enter MySQL - 412 hits. The first screen of books are nearly all
devoted to MySQL.
Enter Postgres - 94 hits. None of the books on the first screen seem to
be devoted to Postgres, but just mention it incidentally.
Google - Enter MySQL - 15.6 million hits. Postgres -
Ahh. Re-read my post. The proper name of the product is postgresql and
not postgres. You should find 112 hits on books...
HTH! :)
Rich
Rich JesseSystem/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA
-Original
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, 20 January 2004 23:59
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: Re: Oracle vs Mysql
if Oracle is offshoring its develeoping of its database,
everyone
I think he is talking about 100GB database. Can PostgreSQL and MySQL handle
that size? We used MySQL in some of the web projects, but it just stores
small set of operational data and later on those data are moved to Oracle as
a permenant store. For small set of data, MySQL is quite good, but it
Ryan,
It's postgres.org. I'm not sure how they generate the operating revenue they
need, but that's why they are not advertising like MySql AB is.
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 5:05 PM
To: Multiple
Sounds like the old Oracle vs. Ingress battles. Oracle won because it was
better at marketing. All detailed in the book The Difference Between God
and Larry Ellison. I can see it now -- MySQL, the Oracle of the free
databases.
Dennis Williams
DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
-L
To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: Oracle vs Mysql
Sounds like the old Oracle vs. Ingress battles. Oracle won because it was
better at marketing. All detailed in the book The Difference Between God
and Larry Ellison. I can see
that matters.
Jared
DENNIS WILLIAMS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/19/2004 04:04 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: Oracle vs Mysql
Sounds like
DENNIS WILLIAMS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sounds like the old Oracle vs. Ingress battles. Oracle won because it
was
better at marketing. All detailed in the book The Difference Between
God
and Larry Ellison. I can see it now -- MySQL, the Oracle of the free
Bzzzt. Oracle won because it
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/19/2004 04:04 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: Oracle vs Mysql
Sounds like the old Oracle vs. Ingress battles. Oracle
can't beat them, join them...
:)
Cheers
Nuno Souto
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
Excellent reasoning Nuno. I hadn't thought of that.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Nuno Souto
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 4:04 AM
Hi,
I've been asked by management to explore the pros and cons of Mysql vs Oracle. The
database in question will be a web
based text and multimedia retrieval
On 01/14/2004 04:49:52 PM, Jesse, Rich wrote:
Expect to pay about the same for PostgreSQL support as you would for Oracle.
15% of the purchase price/year?
--
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Mladen Gogala
INET: [EMAIL
If you have the choice, look at PostgreSQL in addition to MySQL. From what
I've seen, it's more mature than MySQL.
My $.02,
Rich
Rich Jesse System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Quad/Tech Inc, Sussex, WI USA
-Original Message-
Sent:
On 01/14/2004 12:44:25 PM, Jesse, Rich wrote:
If you have the choice, look at PostgreSQL in addition to MySQL. From what
I've seen, it's more mature than MySQL.
I second that. PostgresSQL supports transactions and uses perl as its
scripting language. From what little I read and saw (just a
what is DBI?
is postgre free? Is it like linux where you pay for support? I cant find any
licensing info on the website. Most shops dont need oracle, sql server,
sybase, or DB2.
Most applications are small. I was on a project where the government had an
Oracle EE license on windows. They didnt
1) DBI is a perl module to handle the communication with various databases.
2) Postgres is free. I believe that you can buy commercial support, but I don't know
where. May be Rich can jump in with that.
3) DBI is free and so is perl. I'm cheap easy, but not free.
On 01/14/2004 02:34:52 PM,
DBI is an extension to perl language which can then be used by perl to talk with
various databases. DBI stands for database interface. With DBI you also have to
load in a specific database driver which is called DBD. For instance for oracle you
have to install DBI and DBD::Oracle. Its really
I don't think MySQL is free for commercial application, for dev and test
purpose it is free.
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 4:29 PM
DBI is an extension to perl language which can then be used by perl to
I'm suspicious about using MySQL or Postgres with a database 100 gigabytes
in size.
(Especially, when their main website appeared to be down when I wanted to
check some of their recent references).
Anyway, if you have availability requirements which don't allow you to take
down your system for
i thought postgre was a for profit company? how do they generate revenues?
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 4:19 PM
1) DBI is a perl module to handle the communication with various
databases.
2) Postgres
There is a commercial arm of PostgreSQL (or at least a partner) for
businesses that require support. Surf on over to:
http://www.pgsql.com
Expect to pay about the same for PostgreSQL support as you would for Oracle.
I don't know of any support for DBI other than the Perl DBI mailing list
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Ryan
Sent: Thursday, 15 January 2004 09:05
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: Oracle vs Mysql
i thought postgre was a for profit company? how do they
generate revenues?
Don't
One more thing which you can tell your boss: MySQL
and Oracle are not comparable, at least not with any trustworthy results. (the
same goes with MySQL and DB2 or Access and SQL server...)
Tanel.
- Original Message -
From:
Mujeeb Chowdhry
To: Multiple recipients of list
:)
Thanks!
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 1:41 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Hi, Ross,
I've got some experience with both
1. You dont have transaction (until the very recent versions, at least)
2. You dont have fererential integrity (FK is declared
I think, you can design an application that aware of those non rollback tech
things and reverse the contain back properly, quite a lot of work need to be
done here.
regards,
Sinardy
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, 2 August 2001 2:56 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
You can't do subqueries in mySQL
You can't use derived tables in mySQL
The foreign key support is defined as not being Full, don't know what that
means.
Dave
-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 11:48 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
The comparisons look good
AFAIK on big thing 'missing' in mySQL is that it
has no journalling (transaction logging) capabilities.
So there's no transaction mgt.. rollbacks...etc..
if things bozo in the middle of a process.. you're dead.
Restore from last backup and hope for the best.
So you wouldn't want to use
Hi, Ross,
I've got some experience with both
1. You dont have transaction (until the very recent versions, at least)
2. You dont have fererential integrity (FK is declared but not enforced)
3. Dont have views
4. Noting like PL/SQL
5. Reader blocks writer
6. Weak type support, for example can put
Yeah, how about basic transaction support? Table locking is a problem when
the database/web site starts to experience a modest number of hits. We
migrate customers from MySQL to Oracle when there are performance problems
and they instantly disappear with Oracle.
MySQL is not ANSI SQL compliant
Certain things don't need transactions.
Do not criticize someone until you walked a mile in their shoes, that way
when you criticize them, you are a mile a way and have their shoes.
Christopher R. Spence OCP MCSE MCP A+ RAPTOR CNA
Oracle DBA
Phone: (978) 322-5744
Fax:(707) 885-2275
www.mysqlsucks.com
mySQL is great for some things, not so great for other things. For what it
is, it is great in general.
I am not one to praise one and bash all the others, but I don't think mySQL
is the best for everything, let alone Oracle the same.
Do not criticize someone until you
Title: RE: Oracle vs. MySQL
- provides master-slave replication only. only 1 master, but i think up to 1000 slaves.
- uses only one port for transactions, so you can easily flood that port if you have large emounts of data
- no referencial integrity. that all has to be built into your product
True, but how can they(MySQL guys) call it a RDBMS if they don't
support transaction? Isn't the ACID is what the RDBMS is all about?
Richard Ji
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/01/01 01:56PM
Certain things don't need transactions.
Do not criticize someone until you walked a mile in their shoes, that
Anyone here have major gripes about
mySQL that oracle solved?
I would not dream of developing without foreign keys/referential
integrity. Oracle catches many of my programming mistakes as
constraint errors before they mess things up and waste a lot of time.
I don't get many constraint errors
49 matches
Mail list logo
