Re: Postgress and MYSQL - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Matt Davies |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Postgress and MYSQL |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1074104285.400587dd0f83c@www.mattdavies.net Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Postgress and MYSQL (Dustin Sallings <dustin@spy.net>) |
Responses |
Re: Postgress and MYSQL
Re: Postgress and MYSQL Re: Postgress and MYSQL |
List | pgsql-general |
I have to agree. In my experience the average database user out there does not need the entire functionality of something like Oracle. It is because of this that I have used MySQL for many years now. In this light (please accept my confession as to being a more prolific MySQL user), I am becoming more converted to Postgress. I am very impressed with the full features of PG, but I have noticed some things that will make PG more useful out of the box. 1. Replication: Like it or not most people regard their data and access to their data as 'invaluable'. If not, why are they storing it. Having a secondary server (read slaves) on which you can perform backups, load balance RO traffic, and eventually use as a failover has been one of the great selling points of MySQL for my specific applications. I wish there were a Master-Master replication scheme out there, but that is not the case. 2. Documentation: In delving deeper into the Postgress database I have tried to find whatever I can to learn more. I have found an Oreilly book out there, but the TOC reads almost the exact same as the online documentation. I ask myself - have they lifted the documentation and are now trying to sell me it bound in book form? MySQL did the same for a while, but it was the other books- problem solving, examples, programming, etc.. that really helped MySQL adoption IMO. MySQL marketing has done much to help the average database user out there feel like they are getting a powerful and feature-rich database. The average user out there is doing nothing more than address books and recipe books. They, however, __THINK__ they are real DBA's because MySQL is happy to lead them to believe that. Having them evangelize the database is like gold. There is no barrier-to-entry (read cash!!!) to MySQL (or Postgress for that matter) that requires business case analysis and hiring of trained professionals to run the database. I see a trend of "DBA's", "Network Admin's", "** Admins'"(fill in blank) out there that lack a fundamental understanding of how a computer works and how you make it work for you, not the other way around. I scoff at most training centers that sit you in front of a terminal (maintained by them) and teach you everything you need to know in 20 days for $1200. They lack the understanding of how I/O works, CPU & caching, ... They know one thing, but they __THINK__ they are the master. I have ranted about this for a point. It is not what the seasoned 20 year UNIX veteran knows about a database/OS that really matters in terms of adoption - it is what the general mass of people __THINKS__ matters. They are becoming ever present in high levels of decision making functions. Perception is the key. My $0.02. Quoting Dustin Sallings <dustin@spy.net>: > > On Jan 14, 2004, at 0:08, Anton.Nikiforov@loteco.ru wrote: > > > around. To make PG known there should be more and more products that > > relay on PG. And this should be not Banking or other mission critical > > projects. It should be a simple forums, picture bases i do not know > > This is very insightful. mySQL is not popular in the enterprise > because it's known to solve big problems, but because it's known to > solve little ones. It seems so wrong, but makes so much sense. > > -- > Dustin Sallings > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster >
pgsql-general by date: