Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim C. Nasby
Subject Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date
Msg-id 20060518182956.GM64371@pervasive.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:56:12PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> the point isn't whether or not MySQL is a competitor ... the point is that 
> there are *alot* of MySQL based applications out there that are a major 
> PITA to convert (or get converted) all at once ...

More importantly, there's a lot of MySQL *users*, and they get to
influence which database is chosen in many companies. For many years,
FreeBSD was far superior technologically to Linux, but Linux had the
popularity to make it into the enterprise.

And MySQL is much closer to being a competitor now than they were in
4.1. And feature-wise they'll probably equal PostgreSQL in the next
release. Will the features be anywhere near as robust or well thought
out? No. But in a heck of a lot of companies that doesn't matter.

Maybe a compatability layer isn't worth doing, but I certainly think
it's very much worthwhile for the community to do everything possible to
encourage migration from MySQL. We should be able to lay claim to most
advanced and most popular OSS database.
-- 
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Next
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?