Re: read this and puke - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Subject | Re: read this and puke |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20020615091648.C18530@mail.libertyrms.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: read this and puke (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Responses |
Re: advocacy
Re: read this and puke |
List | pgsql-general |
On Fri, Jun 14, 2002 at 10:01:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Not only in open source. Remember Betamax? Technically a better > standard than VHS, but it died anyway because it couldn't get enough > market share. That's not exactly true, according to <http://www.urbanlegends.com/products/beta_vs_vhs.html>. But it _is_ an instructive analogy. There are a couple of things about MySQL that give it an advantage. First, it is widely believed to be fast. Second, it is good enough for many types of application. Third, it has "mind share". The first belief seems to be true under light load. Everything I've ever been able to discover about MySQL suggests that it is badly hobbled under heavy load. Work-arounds to that handicap are common. (As an aside, one thing I have noted is that many people -- even ones who ought to know better -- think they can get away with somehow building transactional integrity "in the application, without the speed penalty". I have yet to see that approach work. But it is something many MySQL mavens suggest.) The second belief is certainly true, with the load issues taken into consideration. Maybe what that means is that PostgreSQL plays MS SQL Server to MySQL's Access (ooh, I'll get flamed for that one). But the third is the one that Tom really was worrying about, and he's right to worry. As the AFU page shows, the real advantage that VHS had is that, for whatever reason, it started to take over the market. At some point, there was just no reason to continue supporting Beta. Even though Beta was in firm control of the market at the beginning (and had a full year head start), it ended up losing to VHS on the grounds of ubiquity. RDBMSs are like VCRs in that it is better to use a system a lot of others use, because then you can get stuff (like DBAs) easily. It is a major PITA to hire a PostgreSQL DBA these days. Everyone and his brother knows about MySQL (well, or claims he does!), but competent PostgreSQL people are thin on the ground. And that's a real cost for a company considering using PostgreSQL. Hmm. Maybe there's room for some sort of certification programme? A -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M6K 3E3 +1 416 646 3304 x110
pgsql-general by date: