John Meyer wrote:
> What I think bothers me is this whole concept that if PostgreSQL is to
> flourish, MySQL has to be beaten down. Folks, both products are free,
> both can be used in the same shop (maybe not on the same computer if
> your running them in production). Putting down MySQL will not make
> PostgreSQL any better, or vice versa.
It isn't that simple. There are many on this list that feel that MySQL
does it *wrong* and frankly uses their marketing prowess to make
themselves out to be something they are not. The point below is
extremely valid. MySQL sucks at subselects.
So what is the problem?
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Michael Nolan" <htfoot@gmail.com> writes:
>>> select count(*) from memmast where memid in (select plr_rated_memid from
>>> tnmt_plr where plr_eventid in ('200607163681');
>>> This query takes about a second on PostgreSQL but takes OVER SEVEN MINUTES
>>> on MySQL!
>> Yeah, and we probably would have sucked about as badly before 7.4 or so.
>> There's a long way from "having subselects" to being able to optimize
>> them decently. AFAIK mysql is still at the "we've got subselects!"
>> stage ...
>>
>> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
