I've worked with Oracle, Interbase, and Informix. PostgreSQL is the most
SQL spec compliant of any of them, whether the spec is 89, 92, or 03. I
have not worked with MySQL.
Rick
Robert Treat
<xzilla@users.sourcefor To: John Wells <jbwellsiv@gmail.com>
ge.net> cc: "pgsql-general@postgresql.org"
<pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent by: Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Two questions from the boss (SQL:2003 &&
scalability)
pgsql-general-owner@pos
tgresql.org
10/21/2004 03:56 PM
On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 15:40, John Wells wrote:
> Guys,
>
> My boss has been keeping himself busy reading MySQL marketing pubs,
> and came at me with a few questions this morning regarding PostgreSQL
> features (we're currently moving to PostgreSQL).
>
I'd be interested to see what my$ql has to say about SQL:2003
compliance...
> While I don't think either are really that important for our
> situation, he wanted to know specifically whether PostgreSQL supported
> SQL:2003,
Well, certainly it is not in full compliance, but then who is? I would
say that most of the new features in SQL:2003 are not supported yet,
however if you run into a specific one that you could actually use post
to the list and you'll likely get a good work-around.
and what sort of capabilities PostgreSQL has to scale across
> multiple CPUs and hosts (multithreading, load balancing, etc).
>
Well, PostgreSQL can certainly take advantage of multiple CPU's,
although there are some cases where we could do more (use multiple CPU
on one query). You can also use a combination of tools like pgpool and
slony to set up load balancing depending on your needs... though I
should say that PostgreSQL has tremendous ability to scale up even
without getting into all the buzzword friendly schemes.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
