On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, David Wall wrote:
> Now that MySQL has transaction support through Berkeley DB lib, and it's
> always had way more data types, what are the main advantages postgresql has
> over it? I don't think mysql has subselects and such, but they did add a
> master-slave replication feature as well as online reorganization (perhaps
> locks tables like vacuum?).
I've been using PostgreSQL since about 1997, and only used MySQL for the
first time last year, and MySQL just seems to sparse for a lot of things.
The lack of foreign key contraints and views is a problem for me.
PostgreSQL still has more features, like triggers, rules, referential
integrity, views, sub-selects, row-level locking, to name a few things.
I think MySQL is a very good way to introduce beginners to SQL and
database concepts, but you can only go so far with it. It's very good for
doing archiving of static data and fast retrieval for websites, but I
wouldn't build an e-commerce site with it.
-- Brett
http://www.chapelperilous.net/~bmccoy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Lord:
I just want *___one* one-armed manager so I never have to hear "On
the other hand", again.
