Re: Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again" - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again"
Date
Msg-id 200812032226.mB3MQbs28901@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again"  (Jason Long <mailing.list@supernovasoftware.com>)
Responses Re: Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again"  ("Gurjeet Singh" <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
Jason Long wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
> > I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
> > reference in case it gets forcibly removed...
> >
> > Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant
> > a 2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have
> > guessed that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for
> > me?
> >
> > --
> > * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
> >
> I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
> transactions and subqueries were not existent.  The features I was
> looking for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.
>
> I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

Monty is quite supportive of Postgres.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: two postgres server seeing the same data
Next
From: "Kynn Jones"
Date:
Subject: How to echo statements in sourced file?