PostgreSQL <> MySQL: missing the point? - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Alexey Borzov |
---|---|
Subject | PostgreSQL <> MySQL: missing the point? |
Date | |
Msg-id | 3F658688.6040305@cs.msu.su Whole thread Raw |
Responses |
Re: PostgreSQL <> MySQL: missing the point?
Re: PostgreSQL <> MySQL: missing the point? Re: PostgreSQL <> MySQL: missing the point? |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
Hi! I sometimes have fun flaming about MySQL vs. PostgreSQL on various Russian-language forums. This is an enlightening experience, 'cause you see what sort of advocacy is really needed and really helps building up your flaming skills, as there are many Russian-speaking developers in MySQL AB now. Thus much praise goes to Ian for compiling his excellent "gotchas" list that can help a lot in flaming. But I see no such use for "the bullet list": I don't see target audience for it. There are 2 sorts of people using MySQL: 1) Those who know several RDBMSs and use it only when it is the best tool for the job (read-only web DB, storing logs, etc) 2) Those who know only MySQL and think that it is the Ultimate Solution for Everything. The propaganda should obviously be directed to the category 2) and if you look at MySQL's propaganda, it is. The "bullet list" will not help here, as these people do not know SQL and RDBMS theory past MySQL manual and do not want to learn, while they *think* that MySQL satisfies their needs and will satisfy them for some time. Thus what is really needed is *not* technical document, but a healthy dose of FUD / debunking directed at MySQL. Consider "Why not MySQL?" document by OpenACS developers, but newer and better. Some suggestions for such a document: Development strategies: * PgSQL has an open development model and open architecture, while MySQL is developed by MySQL AB only and is closed. Thus there are third-party solutions for PostgreSQL (PostGIS, tsearch, various replication packages), but not for MySQL. * "Premature optimization is a root of much evil" --- an excellent counter-FUD for MySQL's "speed is a priority" * I remember finding an email by Monty on mysql list archive, dated 1998(?) where he promised MySQL 4.0 Really Soon Now Licensing: * MySQL had atleast 2 license changes, PostgreSQL had none. * Various companies that distribute and support PostgreSQL vs. MySQL AB/Nusphere dispute Data integrity: * Ways to lose your data with MySQL --- Ian's gotchas list * If MySQL is so stable, why does it have myisamchk utility and *built-in* REPAIR TABLE command? * InnoDB's hot backup utility is not free: either transactions or "hot" backup. Functionality * OK, bullet list here. Speed: * PostgreSQL's functional and partial indexes: KILLER feature that should be SHOUTED about. * Benchmarking queries vs. benchmarking applications with a s*itload of workarounds MySQL current favourite is eweek's benchmark ( http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1184846,00.asp ) , it should be debunked: * The queries are really simple * The specification was written in a way to work around MySQL's shortcomings * MySQL's performance is great only with "cache", but every other database can have an app-level cache, too. How does it sound?
pgsql-advocacy by date: