Thread: The best
Can you experts out there tell me whether MySQL is great or PostgreSQL is great.
Thanks
This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Cleared
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE & DISCLAIMER
This message and any attachments are solely intended for the addressee(s). It may also be Sapura Group's confidential, privileged and/or subject to copyright. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure, retransmission or dissemination of this information or any part thereof is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete it from your computer. Take note that any privilege or confidentiality attached to this message is not waived, lost or destroyed due this disclosure. Whilst all care has been taken, Sapura's management disclaims all liability for loss or damage to person or property arising from this message being infected by computer virus or other contamination.
On Thursday 29 May 2003 7:55 am, Saravanan Thulukanam wrote: > Can you experts out there tell me whether MySQL is great or PostgreSQL is > great. Both can be "great" depending on your evaluation criteria. Most people on this list will prefer PostgreSQL otherwise they wouldn't be here. Look carefully at your requirements, decide what feature-set you need (degree of transaction support, schemas, views, rules, triggers, procedural languages etc.) and then do some performance testing on sample data and hardware. Finally, availablility and licencing issues will need to be considered (read the MySQL page on commercial usage). Oh - be sceptical about any benchmarks you see that haven't been produced by yourself. If that answer is vague, then I'm afraid so was the question. HTH -- Richard Huxton
On Thu, 29 May 2003, Saravanan Thulukanam wrote: > Can you experts out there tell me whether MySQL is great or PostgreSQL > is great. Yes, they are both great. MySQL is designed as a high speed data storage system with minimal relational capabilities and almost non-existent contraint capabilities. While they are adding some transactional features, MySQL is still far behind Postgresql in transactional terms. Postgresql is designed as a highly versatile relational database with a focus on getting the data right at all costs and providing the database developer with a feature full environment. While you can use Postgresql in the place of MySQL for many tasks, there are many tasks for which MySQL simply cannot replace Postgresql unless you're willing to do a large amount of coding outside MySQL to make up for the shortcomings. Since database speed has never been an issue for the stuff I do, I've never needed to sacrifice the rich environment of Postgresql for the faster one of MySQL in production.
On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 18:28, scott.marlowe wrote: > MySQL is designed as a high speed data storage system with minimal > relational capabilities and almost non-existent contraint capabilities. ... > Since database speed has never been an issue for the stuff I do, I've > never needed to sacrifice the rich environment of Postgresql for the > faster one of MySQL in production. I would add to that - recent versions of PostgreSQL are not slow. And it makes a great back end for second generation webapps. Speed is no longer an issue. Cheers Tony Grant -- www.tgds.net Library management software toolkit, redhat linux on Sony Vaio C1XD, Dreamweaver MX with Tomcat and PostgreSQL
On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 13:20, Tony Grant wrote: > On Mon, 2003-06-02 at 18:28, scott.marlowe wrote: > > > MySQL is designed as a high speed data storage system with minimal > > relational capabilities and almost non-existent contraint capabilities. > ... > > Since database speed has never been an issue for the stuff I do, I've > > never needed to sacrifice the rich environment of Postgresql for the > > faster one of MySQL in production. > > I would add to that - recent versions of PostgreSQL are not slow. And it > makes a great back end for second generation webapps. > > Speed is no longer an issue. When your join predicate "halves" both use the same datatype. Also, the common aggregates are still pretty slow, not withstanding the "hash aggregator" that should come out in 7.4 which still scans the whole table instead of using supporting indexes. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Ron Johnson, Jr. Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net | | Jefferson, LA USA http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson | | | | Regarding war zones: "There's nothing sacrosanct about a | | hotel with a bunch of journalists in it." | | Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor (Retired) | +-----------------------------------------------------------+