subject:"\[GENERAL\] MySQL versus Postgres"


Daniel Verite wrote:

On the other hand, some of the notes already mentioned on the wiki, such as
for example:
http://www.xach.com/aolserver/mysql-to-postgresql.html
...are so outdated and/or bad that they're probably counter-productive.
...
IMHO such contents should simply be scraped/unlinked.
  


I would happily start removing the obviously outdated content from the 
wiki if something better came along.  It's hard to blow away stuff just 
because it could be better right now, when that would leave that section 
near empty at the end.


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres


Marco Colombo wrote:
Well, many defaults are hardcoded into a file now. I'd like to see 
'auto' among possible values of parameters, e.g.:
with PG wild guessing reasonable values based on system specs. It may 
be a awful piece of code (getting system info is very platform 
specific), and sometimes the guess may be wrong.


The problem here is that the amount of shared memory a system can 
allocate is hard to discover any other way than starting the server and 
seeing if it works.  So doing what you advise will leave the database 
unable to start on any system that hasn't gotten the right OS kernel 
tweaks done first.  If there was an obvious 'auto' setting, I guarantee 
you newcomers would use it without consulting the documentation first, 
then tell everyone it doesn't work because their server broke when it 
was enabled.  There is a technique used when you run initdb to try and 
detect the shared memory allocation range possible, but it really 
doesn't scale very well into the sizes needed to be useful for this.


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-11 Thread Marco Colombo


On 11/08/2010 17:34, Greg Smith wrote:

The problem here is that the amount of shared memory a system can
allocate is hard to discover any other way than starting the server and
seeing if it works. So doing what you advise will leave the database
unable to start on any system that hasn't gotten the right OS kernel
tweaks done first.


Well, is that true under Windows, too? I think we need to cover Windows, 
here.


Under unix, having postgresql start correctly is a concern of the 
distribution vendor. Even if the guessing isn't bullet-proof, the vendor 
either knows how to configure the kernel to have the 'auto' thing work, 
or is able to provide its own postgresql.conf.


Sure, there are people who download and compile, but I don't think they 
are afraid of editing postgresql.conf should the server fail to start.


Also, I'd say this is a case where it's much better to fail with a 
message listen buddy, your server has 64GB of RAM installed but your 
kernel is configured for 20MB of shared memory only, you should really 
increase it, rather than start successfully but with very poor 
performance. It's a matter of correctness: I see PG as a high 
performance database system. Allowing to start it in awfully suboptimal 
conditions it's no different from allowing '-00-00' as a date: it 
may give you the idea you did the right thing, but most of the time you 
didn't.


.TM.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-11 Thread Tom Lane

Marco Colombo pg...@esiway.net writes:
 It's a matter of correctness: I see PG as a high 
 performance database system. Allowing to start it in awfully suboptimal 
 conditions it's no different from allowing '-00-00' as a date: it 
 may give you the idea you did the right thing, but most of the time you 
 didn't.

Unfortunately, there are quite a few of us for whom correctness
doesn't mean automatically try to eat all the resources available.
Your view of what is useful behavior is far too narrow-minded ...

regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-11 Thread Ma Sivakumar

2010/8/12 Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us:

Unfortunately, there are quite a few of us for whom correctness
doesn't mean automatically try to eat all the resources available.
Your view of what is useful behavior is far too narrow-minded ...

The point is, some one installing PostgreSQL for the first time is not
aware that configuration parameters should be changed to much higher
values than defaults in postgresql.conf

There can be a stronger and more prominent hint / recommendation in
postgresql.conf file, in install README, Resource Consumption section
of manual
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/runtime-config-resource.html)
and other appropriate places :

1. README has after Post Installation Setup, Getting Started under What Now?

The default configuration is, however, not designed for
optimum performance. To achieve optimum performance, several server
parameters must be adjusted, the two most common being shared_buffers
and work_mem. ---

= This comment can be included immediately after Post Installation Setup.

3. Then in the manual, shared_buffers section says

The default is typically 32 megabytes (32MB), but might be less if
your kernel settings will not support it (as determined during
initdb). This setting must be at least 128 kilobytes. (Non-default
values of BLCKSZ change the minimum.) However, settings significantly
higher than the minimum are usually needed for good performance.

If you have a dedicated database server with 1GB or more of RAM, a
reasonable starting value for shared_buffers is 25% of the memory in
your system.

and then there are comments like
it is unlikely that an allocation of more than 40% of RAM to
shared_buffers will work better than a smaller amount.

Increasing this parameter might cause PostgreSQL to request more
System V shared memory than your operating system's default
configuration allows. See Section 17.4.1 for information on how to
adjust those parameters, if necessary

== Can a final

We recommend that you to set shared_buffers to 25% of system memory
you can allocate for PostgreSQL

be included.

4. work_mem section says

Note that for a complex query, several sort or hash operations might
be running in parallel; each one will be allowed to use as much memory
as this value specifies before it starts to put data into temporary
files. Also, several running sessions could be doing such operations
concurrently. So the total memory used could be many times the value
of work_mem; it is necessary to keep this fact in mind when choosing
the value. Sort operations are used for ORDER BY, DISTINCT, and merge
joins. Hash tables are used in hash joins, hash-based aggregation, and
hash-based processing of IN subqueries.

This makes Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for a new user
trying out PostgreSQL.

Can something like this included?

It is recommended that about X% of your system memory to be set as
work_mem. You may have to monitor system performance and adjust this
setting as required

Best regards,

Ma Sivakumar
எல்லோரும் எல்லாமும் பெற வேண்டும்
http://masivakumar.blogspot.com

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres


Ma Sivakumar wrote:

There can be a stronger and more prominent hint / recommendation in
postgresql.conf file,  in install README, Resource Consumption section
of manual 
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/runtime-config-resource.html)
and other appropriate places
  


What you might not be aware of is that most of the text you quoted was 
just added to the PostgreSQL documentation in the last couple of 
months.  That already represents a good step forward from earlier 
versions; until quite recently 
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/runtime-config-resource.html 
was how that looked even for 8.3 and 8.4.  I'm happy that we've already 
made a big step forward in helping new users here in that update.  At 
least now DBAs used to other systems who go looking for the how do I 
set the size of the cache? knob will stumble on reasonable advice in 
the manual, which was not the case before.  So I already expect this 
situation to be much better than it has ever been.



Can a final
We recommend that you to set shared_buffers to 25% of system memory
you can allocate for PostgreSQL
be included.
  


If only it were that easy.  25%, but only on a dedicated server, don't 
go above 8GB, limit to much less than that on Windows, and be extremely 
careful if you're writing heavily lest large checkpoints squash you.  
Giving simple advice that people might follow without thinking about 
actually has some worst-case downsides that are worse than not tuning 
the server at all.



This makes Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for a new user
trying out PostgreSQL.
  


Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for everyone, not just new 
users.  If it were easy for anyone, we'd just bottle whatever experts do 
into the software directly.  I tried doing a round of that with pgtune, 
and it's still not quite right yet even after surveying everyone who had 
an opinion on the subject.


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-11 Thread Sandeep Srinivasa

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:

 If only it were that easy.  25%, but only on a dedicated server, don't go
 above 8GB, limit to much less than that on Windows, and be extremely careful
 if you're writing heavily lest large checkpoints squash you.  Giving simple
 advice that people might follow without thinking about actually has some
 worst-case downsides that are worse than not tuning the server at all.


  This makes Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for a new user
 trying out PostgreSQL.



 Increasing work_mem is a complex calculation for everyone, not just new
 users.  If it were easy for anyone, we'd just bottle whatever experts do
 into the software directly.  I tried doing a round of that with pgtune, and
 it's still not quite right yet even after surveying everyone who had an
 opinion on the subject.


 Maybe a tabular form would be nice - work_mem under a) windows  8GB b)
windows  8gb c) linux  8gb d) linux  8gb e) read-heavy f) write-heavy
g)log shipping enabled etc etc.
Rinse and repeat for all important parameters - in a wiki, you can do nifty
things like add footnotes, etc.
That would be awesome!

-Sandeep

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres


Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:

 Maybe a tabular form would be nice - work_mem under...


The problem with work_mem in particular is that the useful range depends 
quite a bit on how complicated you expect the average query running to 
be.  pgtune tries to model this using an input of what type of 
application you're running; presuming that a data warehouse application 
is far more likely to sort/hash a lot of data in one query than a web 
application for example.  But even that relatively simple idea has 
proven to be confusing to a lot of people, based on the feedback I've 
gotten.


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-10 Thread Jacqui Caren-home


Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

Do not overemphasize the example mode at the cost of presenting concepts
or structure.  You need all three.


Hmm I recently had to find out the various options to get values from a tuple
via SPI - referred by docs to the contrib examples :-(
Docs did not help and the examples only cover very basic cases.
I found the quickest way to find the list of macro's available was to read the 
source code :-)

I suppose the source is the final layer of documentation!

Jacqui



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-10 Thread Greg Smith


சிவகுமார் மா wrote:

1. Almost all webhosting providers have MySQL support, but PostgreSQL
support is available from only a few who also have MySQL support.
Hence MySQL is universal and PostgreSQL is present as also available.
  


http://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_hosting lists far more 
than a few.  I think the only real area to complain about here is that 
there are definitely multiple sources for free small-scale MySQL 
hosting, but none I'm aware of for PostgreSQL.  I'm not sure what anyone 
here can do about that though.



a. Documentation is already available (PostgreSQL User Manual,
PostgreSQL Technical Documentation). Re-package them and publish as
books targeting different user levels.
  


Fultus already sells printed copies of the documentation.  They're not 
very popular.  Given that the trend everywhere is toward e-books, and 
you can get a free PostgreSQL manual in PDF form already, I'm not sure 
who exactly would be served by repackaging them in any way.  What's 
needed here is completely new content.



b. Cook Books can be created from the discussions in this mailing list.
  


We've already been doing that on the -performance list successfully; a 
good portion of things people used to get individual responses to now 
can be directed toward an article from 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Performance_Optimization instead.


The problem is that few discussions happen on these lists for things 
like how do I get used to PostgreSQL after growing up on MySQL?  And 
that material will never be appropriate for the PostgreSQL 
documentation.  I would highly encourage people to migrate their own 
personal notes on such things to the very under-maintained section at 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Converting_from_other_Databases_to_PostgreSQL#MySQL



3. The default configuration settings for PostgreSQL are not optimal
for performance. Can there be a recommended configuration file in the
installation (assuming certain amount of RAM and processor type) ?
  


This doesn't work because there are many different types of database 
applications, and what's optimal even as a starting configuration for 
each type is very different.  Also, hardware changes pretty fast; you'd 
be hard pressed to write down useful generic recommendations (or insert 
them into the core database code) that are still relevant at all after a 
release has been out a few years.


--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
g...@2ndquadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Allan Kamau

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Scott Frankel fran...@circlesfx.com wrote:

 On Aug 8, 2010, at 2:45 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:

 Scott Frankel schrieb:

 On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:

 John Gage schrieb:

 On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features cut
 and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do today with
 MySQL.

 Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other
 programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them. The 
 will
 copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing. Learning is the way
 to understanding, not copying.

 I couldn't disagree more.  Presenting working code (at least snippets)
 should continue to be a fundamental part of any documentation project.

 You missunderstand me. Working code is a fundamental part of any
 documentation. But we talk about a handbook with code that works in
 PostgreSQL and does the same thinks in MySQL.
 This way the trainees won't learn how PostgreSQL works, the just learn the
 different examples. Giving them training-problems and the PostgreSQL
 handbook is out of my experience the best way. It tooks longer for them to
 solve the problems, but in this way they are able to solve problems, which
 are not related to the presented examples.

 I understand and appreciate your position.  Thanks for the clarification.

 While I believe that this thread has, for all intents and purposes, run its
 course (and I look forward to reading the documentation it informs), I'm
 going to go out on a limb and present an additional use-case that may be
 unpopular, or at least controversial.

 There are times when a documentation's audience is not interested in taking
 the subject matter to expert level.  (eg:  informed supervisory or
 vendor-client relationships, proof of concept development, hobbies, c.).
  For those cases, a working understanding is all that's strictly
 necessary.  Annotated, cookbook-style code reference is especially well
 suited for that mode of learning.

 Regards,
 Scott



I think it is important to have some examples in the documentation.
Some kind of balance between few examples and too many examples.
From what I have seen many users in this mailing list usually do
include some example code of the problem they have as an aid to
explaining their current situation. This seems to me quite useful. The
other day I asked for help in implementing  DISTINCT ON like
behaviour and was pointed correctly to the docs. The examples in
DISTINCT ON documentation quickly led me to understand the working
of this command. Sometime back I was learning about Window functions
(rank() and so on) where I found the examples very useful and I feel
it would have been a challenge for me to understand these concepts
without the use of examples.

There may be worry of copy and paste without proper understanding of
the code and concepts but this may be mitigated IMHO by fact that it
seems unlikely that when presented with a case to solve, simple copy
and paste of several commands (in the right sequence) will happen and
correctly solve the problem at hand without appreciation of what these
commands and statements do. Also more often or not the copy and
paste will only work on specific schema definitions and data used in
the example, therefore reconstruction (hence understanding) of these
commands is neccessary.



Allan.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Sandeep Srinivasa

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Allan Kamau kamaual...@gmail.com wrote:


 There may be worry of copy and paste without proper understanding of
 the code and concepts but this may be mitigated IMHO by fact that it
 seems unlikely that when presented with a case to solve, simple copy
 and paste of several commands (in the right sequence) will happen and
 correctly solve the problem at hand without appreciation of what these
 commands and statements do. Also more often or not the copy and
 paste will only work on specific schema definitions and data used in
 the example, therefore reconstruction (hence understanding) of these
 commands is neccessary.


The way I see it - for those who want to truly learn, there is the
documentation. For those who dont, there are ORMs.
For the rest of us, still floundering in MySQL land, please build a bridge.

-Sandeep

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Thomas Kellerer


Sandeep Srinivasa wrote on 09.08.2010 08:54:

The way I see it - for those who want to truly learn, there is the
documentation. For those who dont, there are ORMs.


Another of those ORM myths ;)

ORMs are not an alternative to learning SQL or understand how a DBMS works.
You need to be good at SQL and you need a good understanding of relational 
databases in order to use an ORM efficiently.

One of the first sentences in the Hibernate manual is: If you have a limited 
knowledge of JAVA or SQL, it is advised that you start with a good introduction to that 
technology prior to attempting to learn Hibernate

Regards
Thomas


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Craig Ringer

On 09/08/10 14:54, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:

 
 The way I see it - for those who want to truly learn, there is the
 documentation. For those who dont, there are ORMs.

Ha, I wish!

Despite being rather comfortable with SQL I've been using the Hibernate
ORM system in a project to try to reduce some of the repetitive coding,
while falling back to JDBC and hand-coded SQL where Hibernate doesn't do
a great job. This is my first venture into ORM-land, and may well be my
last.

The amount of learning required in getting the ORM to behave even
vaguely sanely in anything but trivial situations is vastly greater than
what's required to use plain SQL. I'm not at all sure it's worth it for
anything but the hugest projects, as I've wasted way more time battling
Hibernate than I would've done writing all the repetitive template
classes and SQL mappings myself. All the lazy-loading stuff is useless
in practice, because you're always working with detached entities by the
time you need it, so it doesn't help with the problem of figuring out
what data your app is going to need well before it asks for it.

Additionally, ORM system authors seem to consider the database to be
getting uppity and above its place if it's used for anything much more
than a dumb row store. Basic database features like referential
integrity constraints (especially things like ON DELETE CASCADE),
in-database triggers, column privileges, etc tend to confuse it
mightily, because it assumes it'll be the only thing making changes to
the database. Hibernate is better than most in this regard, and way
better than things like ActiveRecord (from Ruby on Rails) in that it
understands most basic database features and can be told not to cache
between sessions, but it still gets frustrating as soon as you try to do
things like use weird data types like the native xml type in Pg,
(for which I had to write a custom UserType mapping).

You certainly do need to have a decent understanding of basic SQL to use
an ORM reasonably efficiently, including the trade-offs of joins vs
subqueries, how queries can be rewritten/replanned by the database, the
cost of vast numbers of repeated small queries vs large-and-expensive
one-off multi-way joins that return repetitive information, the effect
of latency and planning time, the difference between prepared and
one-off statements, parameter placement, etc. That said, there are large
sections of the SQL language that most ORMs appear to never go anywhere
near. You won't be using window functions and custom aggregates in any ORM.

-- 
Craig Ringer

Tech-related writing: http://soapyfrogs.blogspot.com/

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Michael A. Peters



 On Aug 8, 2010, at 2:45 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:

*snip*

 I understand and appreciate your position.  Thanks for the
 clarification.

 While I believe that this thread has, for all intents and purposes,
 run its course (and I look forward to reading the documentation it
 informs), I'm going to go out on a limb and present an additional use-
 case that may be unpopular, or at least controversial.

 There are times when a documentation's audience is not interested in
 taking the subject matter to expert level.  (eg:  informed supervisory
 or vendor-client relationships, proof of concept development, hobbies,
 c.).  For those cases, a working understanding is all that's
 strictly necessary.  Annotated, cookbook-style code reference is
 especially well suited for that mode of learning.

As a recent convert from MySQL (I needed PostGIS) who has also seen the
benefit of Postgresql over MySQL in numerous other areas, that's exactly
what I am doing for myself.

I have 4x6 cards that I write the postgresql way of doing what I use to do
with MySQL so that I can easily reference them when I need to.

Should I sit down and read a book and go through the exercises?
Yes. But I need to get stuff done now, and the cheat sheets I make for
myself let me do just that.

I am not a DBA - I am not even a web developer.
I do both because I can't afford to hire them, and when I have used stuff
created by them, very frequently their code is clearly crap and insecure
and even I can see that, so unless I really want to pay the big bucks,
it's better for me to do it myself and cheat sheets really help.

-
Michael A. Peters

http://www.shastaherps.org/

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Sandeep Srinivasa

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Michael A. Peters
mpet...@shastaherps.orgwrote:


 I have 4x6 cards that I write the postgresql way of doing what I use to do
 with MySQL so that I can easily reference them when I need to.

 Should I sit down and read a book and go through the exercises?
 Yes. But I need to get stuff done now, and the cheat sheets I make for
 myself let me do just that.

 I am not a DBA - I am not even a web developer.
 I do both because I can't afford to hire them, and when I have used stuff
 created by them, very frequently their code is clearly crap and insecure
 and even I can see that, so unless I really want to pay the big bucks,
 it's better for me to do it myself and cheat sheets really help.


Could you share them ? Maybe put them up on the Postgres wiki.
The other similar resource that I see is :
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Converting_MySQL_to_PostgreSQL

-Sandeep

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Scott Ribe

It's not a requirement, just a reasonable default.

On Aug 7, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Martin Gainty wrote:

 3)eliminate the requirement to create a postgres user to execute the server 
 binaries..I guess i never understood that requirement 


-- 
Scott Ribe
scott_r...@elevated-dev.com
http://www.elevated-dev.com/
(303) 722-0567 voice





-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Randal L. Schwartz

 Joshua == Joshua J Kugler jos...@eeinternet.com writes:

Joshua I'll add in a me too only to say that I am someone that learns
Joshua best by example.

Keep in mind though that there are three primary learning modes:
- example
- concept
- structure

Do not overemphasize the example mode at the cost of presenting concepts
or structure.  You need all three.

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
mer...@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Joshua D. Drake

On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 10:09 -0600, Scott Ribe wrote:
 It's not a requirement, just a reasonable default.

The actual requirement is:

Thou shall not use a privelaged user, e.g; Administrator or UID = 0.

Not only is that a reasonable default, MySQL is broken because of
theirs.

Joshua D. Drake


-- 
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt


-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Joshua J. Kugler

On Monday 09 August 2010, Randal L. Schwartz elucidated thus:
  Joshua == Joshua J Kugler jos...@eeinternet.com writes:

 Joshua I'll add in a me too only to say that I am someone that
 learns Joshua best by example.

 Keep in mind though that there are three primary learning modes:
 - example
 - concept
 - structure

 Do not overemphasize the example mode at the cost of presenting
 concepts or structure.  You need all three.

Oh, definitely.  I like reading the concepts and structure of how, say, 
an API works, and use it for reference, but what really cements *how* 
to use it is those examples.

j

-- 
Joshua Kugler
Part-Time System Admin/Programmer
http://www.eeinternet.com
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/  ID 0x73B13B6A

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Joshua J. Kugler

On Monday 09 August 2010, Joshua D. Drake elucidated thus:
 On Mon, 2010-08-09 at 10:09 -0600, Scott Ribe wrote:
  It's not a requirement, just a reasonable default.

 The actual requirement is:

 Thou shall not use a privelaged user, e.g; Administrator or UID = 0.

 Not only is that a reasonable default, MySQL is broken because of
 theirs.

 Joshua D. Drake

Hmm...I've always seen MySQL run under the user mysql.  Of course, 
mysqld_safe (the script that restarts mysql if it crashes) starts as 
root, but the actually binary runs as mysql.

j

-- 
Joshua Kugler
Part-Time System Admin/Programmer
http://www.eeinternet.com
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/  ID 0x73B13B6A

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-09 Thread Tom Lane

Joshua J. Kugler jos...@eeinternet.com writes:
 On Monday 09 August 2010, Joshua D. Drake elucidated thus:
 The actual requirement is:
 
 Thou shall not use a privelaged user, e.g; Administrator or UID = 0.
 
 Not only is that a reasonable default, MySQL is broken because of
 theirs.

 Hmm...I've always seen MySQL run under the user mysql.  Of course, 
 mysqld_safe (the script that restarts mysql if it crashes) starts as 
 root, but the actually binary runs as mysql.

That's how it's done if the user/packager knows what they're doing.
The problem is that not only doesn't mysql enforce that, it isn't
the default --- mysqld_safe is perfectly happy to launch the server
as root if you don't tell it not to.  If you dig hard enough in their
manuals, you can find a recommendation to not run the server as root;
but they don't exactly push you to avoid that.

regards, tom lane

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-08 Thread Torsten Zühlsdorff


Scott Frankel schrieb:


On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:


John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features cut 
and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do today 
with MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other 
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them. 
The will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing. 
Learning is the way to understanding, not copying.


I couldn't disagree more.  Presenting working code (at least snippets) 
should continue to be a fundamental part of any documentation project.


You missunderstand me. Working code is a fundamental part of any 
documentation. But we talk about a handbook with code that works in 
PostgreSQL and does the same thinks in MySQL.
This way the trainees won't learn how PostgreSQL works, the just learn 
the different examples. Giving them training-problems and the PostgreSQL 
handbook is out of my experience the best way. It tooks longer for them 
to solve the problems, but in this way they are able to solve problems, 
which are not related to the presented examples.


Greetings from Germany,
Torsten

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-08 Thread Scott Frankel



On Aug 8, 2010, at 2:45 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:


Scott Frankel schrieb:

On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:

John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features  
cut and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do  
today with MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other  
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them.  
The will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing.  
Learning is the way to understanding, not copying.
I couldn't disagree more.  Presenting working code (at least  
snippets) should continue to be a fundamental part of any  
documentation project.


You missunderstand me. Working code is a fundamental part of any  
documentation. But we talk about a handbook with code that works in  
PostgreSQL and does the same thinks in MySQL.
This way the trainees won't learn how PostgreSQL works, the just  
learn the different examples. Giving them training-problems and the  
PostgreSQL handbook is out of my experience the best way. It tooks  
longer for them to solve the problems, but in this way they are able  
to solve problems, which are not related to the presented examples.


I understand and appreciate your position.  Thanks for the  
clarification.


While I believe that this thread has, for all intents and purposes,  
run its course (and I look forward to reading the documentation it  
informs), I'm going to go out on a limb and present an additional use- 
case that may be unpopular, or at least controversial.


There are times when a documentation's audience is not interested in  
taking the subject matter to expert level.  (eg:  informed supervisory  
or vendor-client relationships, proof of concept development, hobbies,  
c.).  For those cases, a working understanding is all that's  
strictly necessary.  Annotated, cookbook-style code reference is  
especially well suited for that mode of learning.


Regards,
Scott





Greetings from Germany,
Torsten

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general




--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread Alban Hertroys

On 7 Aug 2010, at 5:19, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:

 +1 on this.
 This is very interesting from the point-of-view of transitioning MySQL 
 webapps to Postgres. The truth is that for a lot of people, MySQL is their 
 first DB (because of loads of pre-existing software. Refer to my thread 
 Which CMS/Ecommerce/shopping cart). When we are ready to move to PG, we are 
 already used to the MySQL way of doing things.

Oh gosh, you make me remember my first MySQL experience! I had just started a 
small company that was starting their main project on a MySQL/PHP environment 
on Windows. We ran into some trouble with Windows IIRC and the sysadmin was 
happier running stuff on Linux too, so we switched our early code and database 
over to Linux. Turns out that in MySQL, going from a case-insensitive 
file-system to a case-sensitive one means that all your table names are now 
case-sensitive as well!

That, and the struggle getting MySQL to actually use InnoDB and relational 
integrity on tables instead of just claiming that it did, made it a really easy 
case for me to convince my colleagues and boss to switch to Postgres. They 
haven't looked back since.

That was back in the days of MySQL 4, but the scars it left are still there. 
That company has gone bankrupt in the meantime (core developers moved away), 
but I run into some of my old colleagues every now and then and they're almost 
all still doing their stuff on Postgres - or at least not on MySQL. One 
exception is the guy who has to use one of their real-time engines for 
telecommunication, where data-integrity apparently isn't considered critical.

Alban Hertroys

--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest.


!DSPAM:737,4c5d30a7286211834955988!



-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread சிவகுமார் மா

2010/8/7 Alban Hertroys dal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl:
 On 7 Aug 2010, at 5:19, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:

 +1 on this.
 This is very interesting from the point-of-view of transitioning MySQL 
 webapps to Postgres. The truth is that for a lot of people, MySQL is their 
 first DB (because of loads of pre-existing software. Refer to my thread 
 Which CMS/Ecommerce/shopping cart). When we are ready to move to PG, we 
 are already used to the MySQL way of doing things.


As it was happening in the last 10 years, PostgreSQL will slowly
gather more acceptance and MySQL will reduce in popularity down the
years. But, we should help the process along.

1. Almost all webhosting providers have MySQL support, but PostgreSQL
support is available from only a few who also have MySQL support.
Hence MySQL is universal and PostgreSQL is present as also available.

2. Books.
In a book store (where I live), technical sections have SQL, SQL
Server, PHP and MySQL, Oracle racks. There is no PostgreSQL rack.

3. Name
It is difficult to bring up the name in conversation.

To break these circles:

1. Study a typical web hosting set up and work on supporting
everything (Wordpress, Drupal, OS Commerce) with PostgreSQL.
PostgreSQL only servers should be made possible.

2. Bring out more books

a. Documentation is already available (PostgreSQL User Manual,
PostgreSQL Technical Documentation). Re-package them and publish as
books targeting different user levels.

b. Cook Books can be created from the discussions in this mailing list.

c. More PHP+PostgreSQL books should be created. Professional PHP6
from Wrox uses PostgreSQL as the default db.

3. The default configuration settings for PostgreSQL are not optimal
for performance. Can there be a recommended configuration file in the
installation (assuming certain amount of RAM and processor type) ?

4. A pet name
Is it possible to have a pet name which can be used in casual
conversation easily?

Ma Sivakumar
http://masivakumar.blogspot.com

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread David Boreham


On 8/7/2010 4:24 AM, சிவகுமார் மா wrote:


4. A pet name
Is it possible to have a pet name which can be used in casual
conversation easily?
   

PG



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread Raymond O'Donnell


On 07/08/2010 11:24, சிவகுமார் மா wrote:

2010/8/7 Alban Hertroysdal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl:

On 7 Aug 2010, at 5:19, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:


+1 on this.
This is very interesting from the point-of-view of transitioning MySQL webapps to 
Postgres. The truth is that for a lot of people, MySQL is their first DB (because of 
loads of pre-existing software. Refer to my thread Which CMS/Ecommerce/shopping 
cart). When we are ready to move to PG, we are already used to the MySQL way of 
doing things.




As it was happening in the last 10 years, PostgreSQL will slowly
gather more acceptance and MySQL will reduce in popularity down the
years. But, we should help the process along.

1. Almost all webhosting providers have MySQL support, but PostgreSQL
support is available from only a few who also have MySQL support.
Hence MySQL is universal and PostgreSQL is present as also available.

2. Books.
In a book store (where I live), technical sections have SQL, SQL
Server, PHP and MySQL, Oracle racks. There is no PostgreSQL rack.

3. Name
It is difficult to bring up the name in conversation.

To break these circles:

1. Study a typical web hosting set up and work on supporting
everything (Wordpress, Drupal, OS Commerce) with PostgreSQL.
PostgreSQL only servers should be made possible.

2. Bring out more books

a. Documentation is already available (PostgreSQL User Manual,
PostgreSQL Technical Documentation). Re-package them and publish as
books targeting different user levels.

b. Cook Books can be created from the discussions in this mailing list.

c. More PHP+PostgreSQL books should be created.Professional PHP6
from Wrox uses PostgreSQL as the default db.


Yes, so does Pro PHP from Apress, though it doesn't mention PG on the 
cover. There was a nice warm glow of goes without saying... about it, 
as I remember. :-)



4. A pet name
Is it possible to have a pet name which can be used in casual
conversation easily?


Postgres or PG are the usual, AIUI.

Ray.

--
Raymond O'Donnell :: Galway :: Ireland
r...@iol.ie

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread Martin Gainty


Ray--


I would like to see in postgres:
1)Clustering

2)a more user-friendly interface to packages

3)eliminate the requirement to create a postgres user to execute the server 
binaries..I guess i never understood that requirement 

 

I would like to see in MySQL:
A progression back to OpenSource ..i dont see Oracle championing 2 database 
products simultaneously

although under the same roof it would seem the engineering resources currently 
devoted to Oracle features could easily be re-factored to MySQL..

a prime example of a much needed requirement for MySQL ..When will MySQL 
implement row-level locking instead of just table-level locking?

Martin Gainty 
__ 
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité

 
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger 
sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung 
oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem 
Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. 
Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung 
fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le 
destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez 
l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est 
interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe 
quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement 
être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité 
pour le contenu fourni.



 

 Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 14:11:29 +0100
 From: r...@iol.ie
 To: masivaku...@gmail.com
 CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres
 
 On 07/08/2010 11:24, சிவகுமார் மா wrote:
  2010/8/7 Alban Hertroysdal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl:
  On 7 Aug 2010, at 5:19, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:
 
  +1 on this.
  This is very interesting from the point-of-view of transitioning MySQL 
  webapps to Postgres. The truth is that for a lot of people, MySQL is 
  their first DB (because of loads of pre-existing software. Refer to my 
  thread Which CMS/Ecommerce/shopping cart). When we are ready to move to 
  PG, we are already used to the MySQL way of doing things.
 
 
  As it was happening in the last 10 years, PostgreSQL will slowly
  gather more acceptance and MySQL will reduce in popularity down the
  years. But, we should help the process along.
 
  1. Almost all webhosting providers have MySQL support, but PostgreSQL
  support is available from only a few who also have MySQL support.
  Hence MySQL is universal and PostgreSQL is present as also available.
 
  2. Books.
  In a book store (where I live), technical sections have SQL, SQL
  Server, PHP and MySQL, Oracle racks. There is no PostgreSQL rack.
 
  3. Name
  It is difficult to bring up the name in conversation.
 
  To break these circles:
 
  1. Study a typical web hosting set up and work on supporting
  everything (Wordpress, Drupal, OS Commerce) with PostgreSQL.
  PostgreSQL only servers should be made possible.
 
  2. Bring out more books
 
  a. Documentation is already available (PostgreSQL User Manual,
  PostgreSQL Technical Documentation). Re-package them and publish as
  books targeting different user levels.
 
  b. Cook Books can be created from the discussions in this mailing list.
 
  c. More PHP+PostgreSQL books should be created.Professional PHP6
  from Wrox uses PostgreSQL as the default db.
 
 Yes, so does Pro PHP from Apress, though it doesn't mention PG on the 
 cover. There was a nice warm glow of goes without saying... about it, 
 as I remember. :-)
 
  4. A pet name
  Is it possible to have a pet name which can be used in casual
  conversation easily?
 
 Postgres or PG are the usual, AIUI.
 
 Ray.
 
 -- 
 Raymond O'Donnell :: Galway :: Ireland
 r...@iol.ie
 
 -- 
 Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
 To make changes to your subscription:
 http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread Amitabh Kant

2010/8/7 சிவகுமார் மா masivaku...@gmail.com

 3. The default configuration settings for PostgreSQL are not optimal
 for performance. Can there be a recommended configuration file in the
 installation (assuming certain amount of RAM and processor type) ?

 Ma Sivakumar
 http://masivakumar.blogspot.com



pgtune [http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgtune/]  is already available for
this purpose.


Amitabh Kant

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-07 Thread Pavel Stehule

Hello

2010/8/7 Martin Gainty mgai...@hotmail.com:
 Ray--

 I would like to see in postgres:
 1)Clustering
 2)a more user-friendly interface to packages


 3)eliminate the requirement to create a postgres user to execute the server
 binaries..I guess i never understood that requirement


it is simply - security - when pg run under root and somebody hacks
it, then he has a admin rights. When pg will run under postgres and
somebody hacks it the he have access only to database.

Regards

Pavel Stehule


 I would like to see in MySQL:
 A progression back to OpenSource ..i dont see Oracle championing 2 database
 products simultaneously
 although under the same roof it would seem the engineering resources
 currently devoted to Oracle features could easily be re-factored to MySQL..
 a prime example of a much needed requirement for MySQL ..When will MySQL
 implement row-level locking instead of just table-level locking?

 Martin Gainty
 __
 Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité

 Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene
 Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte
 Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht
 dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine
 rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von
 E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.

 Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le
 destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire
 informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie
 de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura
 pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email
 peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter
 aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.




 Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 14:11:29 +0100
 From: r...@iol.ie
 To: masivaku...@gmail.com
 CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
 Subject: Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

 On 07/08/2010 11:24, சிவகுமார் மா wrote:
  2010/8/7 Alban Hertroysdal...@solfertje.student.utwente.nl:
  On 7 Aug 2010, at 5:19, Sandeep Srinivasa wrote:
 
  +1 on this.
  This is very interesting from the point-of-view of transitioning MySQL
  webapps to Postgres. The truth is that for a lot of people, MySQL is 
  their
  first DB (because of loads of pre-existing software. Refer to my thread
  Which CMS/Ecommerce/shopping cart). When we are ready to move to PG, we
  are already used to the MySQL way of doing things.
 
 
  As it was happening in the last 10 years, PostgreSQL will slowly
  gather more acceptance and MySQL will reduce in popularity down the
  years. But, we should help the process along.
 
  1. Almost all webhosting providers have MySQL support, but PostgreSQL
  support is available from only a few who also have MySQL support.
  Hence MySQL is universal and PostgreSQL is present as also available.
 
  2. Books.
  In a book store (where I live), technical sections have SQL, SQL
  Server, PHP and MySQL, Oracle racks. There is no PostgreSQL rack.
 
  3. Name
  It is difficult to bring up the name in conversation.
 
  To break these circles:
 
  1. Study a typical web hosting set up and work on supporting
  everything (Wordpress, Drupal, OS Commerce) with PostgreSQL.
  PostgreSQL only servers should be made possible.
 
  2. Bring out more books
 
  a. Documentation is already available (PostgreSQL User Manual,
  PostgreSQL Technical Documentation). Re-package them and publish as
  books targeting different user levels.
 
  b. Cook Books can be created from the discussions in this mailing list.
 
  c. More PHP+PostgreSQL books should be created.Professional PHP6
  from Wrox uses PostgreSQL as the default db.

 Yes, so does Pro PHP from Apress, though it doesn't mention PG on the
 cover. There was a nice warm glow of goes without saying... about it,
 as I remember. :-)

  4. A pet name
  Is it possible to have a pet name which can be used in casual
  conversation easily?

 Postgres or PG are the usual, AIUI.

 Ray.

 --
 Raymond O'Donnell :: Galway :: Ireland
 r...@iol.ie

 --
 Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
 To make changes to your subscription:
 http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general


-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Torsten Zühlsdorff


John Gage schrieb:

So, perhaps what is needed in any sort of battle with MySQL is an 
introductory documentation that gives specific examples of how to 
achieve oh wow! worthwhile results quickly with Postgres.


I receive my oh wow when i do the same things in Postgres like in 
MySQL: Writting some procedures, triggers and use foreign key. The oh 
wow was that it just *works*. After some years of using MySQL this is a 
very uncommon feeling, even if you are experienced which MySQL. ;)


And after that oh wow you starting reading the manual.

Greetings from Germany,
Torsten

--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8 
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query-Ergebnisse 
auswerten kann.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Phillip Smith

On 6 August 2010 16:08, Torsten Zühlsdorff f...@meisterderspiele.de wrote:


 I receive my oh wow when i do the same things in Postgres like in MySQL:
 Writting some procedures, triggers and use foreign key. The oh wow was
 that it just *works*. After some years of using MySQL this is a very
 uncommon feeling, even if you are experienced which MySQL. ;)


I'm going the other way -- I first started SQL/RDBMS with PostgreSQL, and
now I'm starting to have to deal with MySQL for some things at work. I know
exactly how to do what I want in PG, but doing the same thing in MySQL is
ten times more complicated and has me pulling my hair out :(

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Thomas Kellerer


John Gage wrote on 06.08.2010 04:41:

But most people, including myself, don't even want to know the
documentation exists (for anything). We just want to plunge in and do it.


That just doesn't work and is an attitude that won't get you far.

In order to do things properly you need to learn and understand what you are dealing 
with. Plunging into something might look easy at the start but will get you 
into problems later when you need to understand *why* and *how* things are working.

This is not something unique to Postgres or databases in general. It's not even 
unique to software.
Learn what youare doing (or dealing with) is a strategy that applies to 
everything you do.

Do take the time to read the manuals - including the MySQL manual (because just 
plunging into MySQL simply doesn't work either)
It'll make you a lot more proficient in the long run.

Regards
Thomas



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features cut  
and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do today  
with MySQL.


Such a handbook, featured as the first section of the documentation,  
would take readers through the steps necessary to set up an online  
shopping site, for example, with Postgres.  Cut and paste code is  
absolutely crucial to the success of such a document.


Make it easy.  Make it easy.  Our road in the yellow wood has to be  
the one you can go down the easiest.


John


On Aug 6, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Phillip Smith wrote:

On 6 August 2010 16:08, Torsten Zühlsdorff f...@meisterderspiele.de  
wrote:


I receive my oh wow when i do the same things in Postgres like in  
MySQL: Writting some procedures, triggers and use foreign key. The  
oh wow was that it just *works*. After some years of using MySQL  
this is a very uncommon feeling, even if you are experienced which  
MySQL. ;)



I'm going the other way -- I first started SQL/RDBMS with  
PostgreSQL, and now I'm starting to have to deal with MySQL for some  
things at work. I know exactly how to do what I want in PG, but  
doing the same thing in MySQL is ten times more complicated and has  
me pulling my hair out :(



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Torsten Zühlsdorff


John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features cut 
and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do today with 
MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other 
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them. The 
will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing. Learning is 
the way to understanding, not copying.


Greetings,
Torsten
--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8 
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query-Ergebnisse 
auswerten kann.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres


I only said this to criticize it.  And I agree completely with Thomas.

John


On Aug 6, 2010, at 2:09 PM, Thomas Kellerer wrote:


John Gage wrote on 06.08.2010 04:41:

But most people, including myself, don't even want to know the
documentation exists (for anything). We just want to plunge in and  
do it.


That just doesn't work and is an attitude that won't get you far.

In order to do things properly you need to learn and understand what  
you are dealing with. Plunging into something might look easy at  
the start but will get you into problems later when you need to  
understand *why* and *how* things are working.


This is not something unique to Postgres or databases in general.  
It's not even unique to software.
Learn what youare doing (or dealing with) is a strategy that  
applies to everything you do.


Do take the time to read the manuals - including the MySQL manual  
(because just plunging into MySQL simply doesn't work either)

It'll make you a lot more proficient in the long run.

Regards
Thomas



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

If I recall correctly William Shakespeare did a ton of cutting and  
pasting.  And he was not alone.  My Fair Lady, one of the most  
successful Broadway shows ever, contains whole sections from Shaw's  
play.


We learn by imitation.  I am not suggesting that once you cut and  
paste you call it quits, but it is the only place to begin.


John


On Aug 6, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:


John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features  
cut and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do  
today with MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other  
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them.  
The will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing.  
Learning is the way to understanding, not copying.


Greetings,
Torsten
--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8  
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query- 
Ergebnisse auswerten kann.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

I would also enquire whether one thinks that the examples should be  
removed from the Postgres documentation for fear that they may be cut  
and pasted into an application?


John


On Aug 6, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:


John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features  
cut and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do  
today with MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other  
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them.  
The will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing.  
Learning is the way to understanding, not copying.


Greetings,
Torsten
--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8  
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query- 
Ergebnisse auswerten kann.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Scott Frankel



On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:


John Gage schrieb:

On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features  
cut and paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do  
today with MySQL.


Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other  
programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them.  
The will copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing.  
Learning is the way to understanding, not copying.


I couldn't disagree more.  Presenting working code (at least snippets)  
should continue to be a fundamental part of any documentation project.


As a first-time db programmer and 'casual' user of PostgreSQL, I read  
Bruce Momjian's book to get started.  I rely on the example code  
presented in the current documentation to learn best practices,  
compare against it to troubleshoot my code when it breaks, and provide  
inspiration for elegant solutions to challenges I encounter.


I would further suggest that a QuickStart guide would be an ideal  
addition to the current documentation efforts.  Scanning a basic soup- 
to-nuts solution can often answer fundamental questions more  
efficiently than full-blown documentation can, especially when the  
user is not already familiar with specific terminology to search for  
in the index.


Regards,
Scott



Greetings,
Torsten
--
http://www.dddbl.de - ein Datenbank-Layer, der die Arbeit mit 8  
verschiedenen Datenbanksystemen abstrahiert,
Queries von Applikationen trennt und automatisch die Query- 
Ergebnisse auswerten kann.


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general




--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Scott Frankel fran...@circlesfx.com wrote:

 On Aug 6, 2010, at 6:13 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:

 John Gage schrieb:

 On reflection, I think what is needed is a handbook that features cut and
 paste code to do the things with Postgres that people do today with MySQL.

 Everyone of my trainees want such thing - for databases, for other
 programming-languages etc. It's the worst thing you can give them. The will
 copy, they will paste and they will understand nothing. Learning is the way
 to understanding, not copying.

 I couldn't disagree more.  Presenting working code (at least snippets)
 should continue to be a fundamental part of any documentation project.

I agree. It's especially useful if you're dealing with folks who
already have a clue, but may not be 100% familiar with how SQL or a
particular language.  I had a Perl cookbook back in the day that was
priceless when I was switching from C to Perl.  I didn't just copy and
paste, but I did certainly learn a lot looking at other people's code.

The idea being discussed here is a CookBook and it's extremely useful.
 The current manual has a lot of examples, and some of them are very
much cookbook style.  I'm sure we could always use more.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread zach cruise

john, you're running up against a culture here, and trying to answer
the question: how to make a nerd cool? answer: it can't be done.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:38 PM, zach cruise zachc1...@gmail.com wrote:
 john, you're running up against a culture here, and trying to answer
 the question: how to make a nerd cool? answer: it can't be done.

I'm all in favor of a nice tutorial section in the docs.  But I
certainly don't want pgsql docs to mimick the mysql docs method of
using a tutorial method for most of the beginner information.  It's so
dang hard to find anything I want in the mysql docs because of it.
Once you're somewhat familiar with the db, having to slog through
pages of tutorial to find the bits you want is counterproductive.  The
easy-peasy entry level mentality of the mysql docs works against
experienced users.

pgsql docs, OTOH, are much easier to trawl for the info I need, using
the top down layout that's so easy to use to find what you want.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Peter Bex

On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:09:43PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
 I'm all in favor of a nice tutorial section in the docs.  But I
 certainly don't want pgsql docs to mimick the mysql docs method of
 using a tutorial method for most of the beginner information.  It's so
 dang hard to find anything I want in the mysql docs because of it.
 Once you're somewhat familiar with the db, having to slog through
 pages of tutorial to find the bits you want is counterproductive.  The
 easy-peasy entry level mentality of the mysql docs works against
 experienced users.

+1

I spent half an hour today trying to find the various ways MySQL has
for controlling charsets.  The TOC is unusable and even using the index
it can sometimes be very frustrating to find something.  Postgres has
outstanding docs right now!  It would be a shame to change that.

Tutorials would be good, but in a separate section of the site.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music.
-- Donald Knuth

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

In my fondest moments, I consider myself a nerd, and when I do I think  
I am completely cool.


On Aug 6, 2010, at 9:38 PM, zach cruise wrote:


john, you're running up against a culture here, and trying to answer
the question: how to make a nerd cool? answer: it can't be done.

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general



--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Peter Bex peter@xs4all.nl wrote:
 On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:09:43PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
 I'm all in favor of a nice tutorial section in the docs.  But I
 certainly don't want pgsql docs to mimick the mysql docs method of
 using a tutorial method for most of the beginner information.  It's so
 dang hard to find anything I want in the mysql docs because of it.
 Once you're somewhat familiar with the db, having to slog through
 pages of tutorial to find the bits you want is counterproductive.  The
 easy-peasy entry level mentality of the mysql docs works against
 experienced users.

 +1

 I spent half an hour today trying to find the various ways MySQL has
 for controlling charsets.  The TOC is unusable and even using the index
 it can sometimes be very frustrating to find something.  Postgres has
 outstanding docs right now!  It would be a shame to change that.

For an extra added bonus, show a click-path from the front page
mysql.com to the documentation.  I gave up and just entered
mysql.com/documentation which kicked off the search engine and let me
click somewhere into the 5.1 docs.  Yes I know they're on
dev.mysql.com but still, it feels like a total brochure site from the
front end.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres

2010-08-06 Thread Peter Bex

On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:25:27PM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
 For an extra added bonus, show a click-path from the front page
 mysql.com to the documentation.  I gave up and just entered
 mysql.com/documentation which kicked off the search engine and let me
 click somewhere into the 5.1 docs.  Yes I know they're on
 dev.mysql.com but still, it feels like a total brochure site from the
 front end.

I know :)  They actually have TWO sites: mysql.com which is indeed
a commercial outlet where they try to sell you their commercial offering
and mysql.org which is geared toward developers.  The manual is only
three clicks away on that site.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music.
-- Donald Knuth

-- 
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

Re: [GENERAL] MySQL versus Postgres