Thread: Which database?
Hi I am fairly new to databases, but my boss has assigned me to choose a database system for our company. I know of Oracle databases but they are way too expensive so it's not an option for us. I did some research and came up with two free database systems that seemed to be more popular - MySQL and PostgreSQL. The problem is that I can't make a decision between the two because I have practically no experience. Some say MySQL is easier to use, some say PostgreSQL is more robust etc. Most articles seem to celarly favor one or the other. It is very hard to find an objective comparison. And I have to explain my boss why I chose either one. So perhaps some of you can give me some reasons why to choose MySQL over Postgre. Thanks, Kaarel kaarel@future.ee
Kaarel wrote: > Hi > > I am fairly new to databases, but my boss has assigned me to choose a > database system for our company. I know of Oracle databases but they > are way too expensive so it's not an option for us. I did some > research and came up with two free database systems that seemed to be > more popular - MySQL and PostgreSQL. The problem is that I can't make > a decision between the two because I have practically no experience. > Some say MySQL is easier to use, some say PostgreSQL is more robust > etc. Most articles seem to celarly favor one or the other. It is very > hard to find an objective comparison. And I have to explain my boss > why I chose either one. So perhaps some of you can give me some > reasons why to choose MySQL over Postgre. > > Thanks, > Kaarel > kaarel@future.ee > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html > Depends on your needs Mysql for smaller things. Postgresql for bigger projects. Stored procedures, triggers. Can handle big amounts of data (1 Billion I have seen ). It's more ansi compliant than mysql. The conclusion is: if you have a small non critical applikation that have only selects you better go with mysql. But if the thing will get bigger you will get to it's limits. This problem you don't have with postgresql Regards Ewald Geschwinde
Kaarel wrote: Hi I am fairly new to databases, but my boss has assigned me to choose a database system for our company. I know of Oracle databases but they are way too expensive so it's not an option for us. I did some research and came up with two free database systems that seemed to be more popular - MySQL and PostgreSQL. The problem is that I can't make a decision between the two because I have practically no experience. Some say MySQL is easier to use, some say PostgreSQL is more robust etc. Most articles seem to celarly favor one or the other. It is very hard to find an objective comparison. And I have to explain my boss why I chose either one. So perhaps some of you can give me some reasons why to choose MySQL over Postgre. Thanks, Kaarel kaarel@future.ee --------------------------------- Well, posting on the advocacy list as you did, you should not expect too many pro-mysql statements here. However, I have worked with both databases and I will do my best to give a fair comparison. The short answer: I would use mysql if: 1. I needed to deploy on windows with a simple installation (note: changing soon!) 2. I expected a massive load on a mostly static database and planned to use replication. Postgres is also getting replication soon, but several months away yet. 3. I planned to use some tools which were mysql specific. 4. My data requirements are not overly complex. 5. My database is not critical to my daily operations (to be fair: many high profile sites use mysql to back their database, but this rule applies to the average developer, at least, it applied to me). Otherwise I can tell you that postgres is a better database for most applications. It is has a much richer feature set and is highly configurable. You will not be unhappy if you choose postgres, I can promise you that. Also, if you are learning database programming postgres has better procedural support and good constraints support. These features are very good because they promote good database design. Honestly, unless you have some pretty stiff requirements either database will probably work and thus becomes a matter of taste. However, unless you meet the criteria above, there is not good reason not to choose postgres. Regards, Merlin
Dear Kaarel, > I am fairly new to databases, but my boss has assigned me to choose a > database system for our company. If you are learning databases (for example if you do not know the difference between a table and a view), you may choose solutions like MySQL or MS Access. Personnaly, I have been using MySQL during 3 months when learning SQL and then I switched to PostgreSQL because of MySQL inability to parse complex queries and its poor ODBC interface. On the converse, if you are looking for a comprehensive business-oriented solution, you may consider using a bundle of PostgreSQL database server, pgAdmin3 graphical interface and PhpPgAdmin 3.0 web interface. Downloading and testing is easy: - PostgreSQL 7.3.2 : ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/binary/v7.3.3/RPMS - pgAdmin3 snapshots (Win32 and GNU/Linux GUI) : http://snake.pgadmin.org - PhpPgAdmin 3.0 RC-1: http://phppgadmin.sourceforge.net/ Also, PostgreSQL is well documented: - http://www.postgresql.org/docs/view.php?version=7.3&idoc=1&file=index.html - http://techdocs.postgresql.org/ Many projects are centralized at GBorg - http://gborg.postgresql.org Don't look for complicated things: PostgreSQL main advantage is to answer ***all*** your needs at once, even the most advanced ones (views, triggers, server-side languages, multi-byte support, etc...). Cheers, Jean-Michel
Jean-Michel POURE <jm.poure@freesurf.fr> writes: > Personnaly, I have been using MySQL during 3 months when learning > SQL and then I switched to PostgreSQL because of MySQL inability to > parse complex queries and its poor ODBC interface. Hi Jean-Michel :-) Could you elaborate on this? Both on the ML and at the LSM? -- Jean-Louis Leroy Sound Object Logic http://www.soundobjectlogic.com
On Tuesday 10 June 2003 15:47, Jean-Louis Leroy wrote: > Could you elaborate on this? Both on the ML and at the LSM? MySQL has several well-known technical limitations, but I wron't discuss them during a presenation at LSM for a question of respect. MySQL is free software and as such I respect it. I can only speak in public about PostgreSQL, not MySQL. Cheers, Jean-Michel
> 5. My database is not critical to my daily operations (to be fair: many > high profile sites use mysql to back their database, but this rule > applies to the average developer, at least, it applied to me). Could You please explain this in more detail. Specifically I am afraid I do not understand what do You mean by "backing a database", what is considered not critical and why does this rule apply to the average developer (why not for advanced developer). Kaarel kaarel@future.ee
> Depends on your needs > Mysql for smaller things. Does it mean MySQL is faster or more reliable with smaller amounts of data? Kaarel kaarel@future.ee
Kaarel wrote: > > Depends on your needs > > Mysql for smaller things. > > Does it mean MySQL is faster or more reliable with smaller amounts of data? I think it is faster for simple, read-only (SELECT) queries on small data sets. Large data set, complex WHERE clause, non-SELECT, PostgreSQL is probably faster --- plus we have more of the commercial database features. Think MySQL as MSAccess, PostgreSQL as Oracle. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian wrote: >Kaarel wrote: > > >>>Depends on your needs >>>Mysql for smaller things. >>> >>> >>Does it mean MySQL is faster or more reliable with smaller amounts of data? >> >> > >I think it is faster for simple, read-only (SELECT) queries on small data >sets. > >Large data set, complex WHERE clause, non-SELECT, PostgreSQL is probably >faster --- plus we have more of the commercial database features. > >Think MySQL as MSAccess, PostgreSQL as Oracle. > > > This explanation hits mine with 100% regards Ewald Geschwinde
Kereel wrote: Could You please explain this in more detail. Specifically I am afraid I do not understand what do You mean by "backing a database", what is considered not critical and why does this rule apply to the average developer (why not for advanced developer). _____________ From the developer's point of view, Mission critical means you get fired if it stops working :) More seriously, in a practical sense mission critical usually means small amounts of downtime or data loss are not catastrophic. A vast array of web based applications fit under this category, such as forums, log books, document serving, that type of thing. I made a distinction between development and 'advanced development' to try and explain the high profile systems like Slashdot that run mysql, which (based on my experience with the database), is something I don't really understand. Also, they have replication and a full text searching suite which are nice for web apps. If you are working any type of financial transactions, use postgres, and become familiar with transactions (database, not financial). Merlin
Merlin, > really understand. Also, they have replication and a full text > searching suite which are nice for web apps. We don't have replication yet, but we do have full text searching ... in fact, two different implementations. MySQL is an excellent match for Slashdot because they would rather silently lose 5% or even 25% of comments than have the site slow down for all users. MySQL, with its "performance over everything" design strategy, accomodates this. On the other hand, if you were running a scheduling/financial/HR/inventory application, silently losing 5% ... or even 1% ... of transactions under heavy user load would not be acceptable ... better to have the database shut down. Then you use PostgreSQL. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 12:30, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Merlin,
>
> > really understand. Also, they have replication and a full text
> > searching suite which are nice for web apps.
>
> We don't have replication yet, but we do have full text searching ... in fact,
> two different implementations.
>
> MySQL is an excellent match for Slashdot because they would rather silently
> lose 5% or even 25% of comments than have the site slow down for all users.
> MySQL, with its "performance over everything" design strategy, accomodates
> this.
>
To be fair you'd have to point out they made this decision "a long time
ago" back when mysql was faster than postgresql, and they could use
mysql's replication feature to "scale up" to the number of users they
needed to support.
These days that gap is virtually nonexistent especially when you
consider how much more efficient their code could be if they didn't have
to write all the transaction/data-checking/table-joining logic into
their code and could just let the database do it. Still I can't blame
them for not wanting to rewrite their app.
Along these lines, "The Register" (theregister.com) just decided to
switch their site to bricolage, which is PostgreSQL based.
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert wrote To be fair you'd have to point out they made this decision "a long time ago" back when mysql was faster than postgresql, and they could use mysql's replication feature to "scale up" to the number of users they needed to support. These days that gap is virtually nonexistent especially when you consider how much more efficient their code could be if they didn't have to write all the transaction/data-checking/table-joining logic into their code and could just let the database do it. Still I can't blame them for not wanting to rewrite their app. Along these lines, "The Register" (theregister.com) just decided to switch their site to bricolage, which is PostgreSQL based. Robert Treat ___________________________________________________________ Yes, and as I've mentioned in other posts there are some nice things about mysql besides just being fast. I would prefer to use postgres for almost any type of project, but that does not necessarily mean mysql is bad at all tasks. I still give the mysql team credit for building, writing, and maintaining a wildly popular open source application. Open source success stories are good for everyone involved, even in a single contested market like database servers. Economic success is not zero-sum. I'm glad to hear they were able to procure investment. That is one more brick in the foundation in what is widely considered to be the future of software development. 17m$ goes a long way to convincing middle managers and petty officials that there really is something in this open source business. Indirectly this helps postgres as well; I see the database applications market as full of potential right now. I prefer postgres not just for technical reasons but for the spirit and people behind the project. So long as the postgres team still has that mojo it will still be a better database, even if it gets less notice in the press. Merlin
PostgreSQL. There is no question. I've used both (plus Informix). Stick to open source databases! They place nice with a whole lot more things. Plus PostgreSQL (PSQL) has I think the highest SQL Spec compliance. MySQL is fast, provided you don't use transactions. It is a little more friendly, but only because it makes a lot of assumptions. MySQL expects you to verify your data before insert, PSQL doesn't. Triggers, operators, etc are non-existent or experimental in MySQL. I don't think views exist either. If you get a MySQL implementation and a PostgreSQL implementation, and compare the two, you'll find similar speed over all, but the PostgreSQL implementation will be more hardy. If you're going to be basing your company (or a significant portion of it) on a database, and you have to go between the two, go with PSQL!. Just my $.02 > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-advocacy-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Kaarel > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 8:12 AM > To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org > Subject: [pgsql-advocacy] Which database? > > > Hi > > I am fairly new to databases, but my boss has assigned me to choose a > database system for our company. I know of Oracle databases but they are > way too expensive so it's not an option for us. I did some research and > came up with two free database systems that seemed to be more popular - > MySQL and PostgreSQL. The problem is that I can't make a decision > between the two because I have practically no experience. Some say MySQL > is easier to use, some say PostgreSQL is more robust etc. Most articles > seem to celarly favor one or the other. It is very hard to find an > objective comparison. And I have to explain my boss why I chose either > one. So perhaps some of you can give me some reasons why to choose MySQL > over Postgre. > > Thanks, > Kaarel > kaarel@future.ee > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html >