Thread: Beginner Questions Please: Which To Go With ?
Hello: Am about to sign up for an on-line database course (introductory) Apparently, one must have on their PC for the course either Access postgre mysql Am really new at this. Access is a problem, as the package costs is $200.00 Wow ! I downloaded postgre, but I am a bit stumped on what to do next. The problem is I'm totally unfamiliar with ftp downloads. There are a bunch of folders. What do I open, or do next, please, to get started ? I would like to evaluate postgre and mysql before the course actually starts. Also: what are the major differences between all 3 packages ? Which would be easiest to learn for a true database beginner ? Should perhaps I go with Access despite the cost ? Is it "easier", or are the screens and interface 'better" ? Want to learn one database fairly well, as I think it's something I should know, and would also look good on a job resume. Thanks, Bob lease, to get started
On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 11:34:30AM -0500, Robert11 wrote: > I downloaded postgre, but I am a bit stumped on > what to do next. > The problem is I'm totally unfamiliar with ftp downloads. > > There are a bunch of folders. > > What do I open, or do next, please, to get started ? What operating system are you using? Windows? If so, and you are this new at it, I suspect you'll find PostgreSQL to be a little tricky to use. In any case, the instructions for installation are in the PostgreSQL manual at http://www.postgresql.org. If you can't follow the instructions, or get stumped, you should come back with a question about the point where you're stuck. > Also: what are the major differences between all 3 packages ? Access is not a real SQL database, but it has some SQL interface glued onto it. MySQL was historically very lightweight and missing quite a few features. It is much improved, but continues to have interfaces which, while initially apparently convenient, are sufficiently different from the standard way of doing things that you may experience a lot of pain later. PostgreSQL is a larger system intented for "industrial strength" systems. Having used all three of these, it is the only one among them that I feel actually comfortable trusting data to. This is a prejudice I developed on older versions of MySQL, however, and it is probably not well justified any more. PostgreSQL has the steepest learning curve: you will need to learn a fair amount about what you are doing before you can do anything useful. On the other hand, that initial investment pays handsomely later. > Which would be easiest to learn for a true database beginner ? Probably Access. It's also the least likely to teach you the best database habits, so I'd urge you to consider the additional work for Postgres, just because you'll get a good grounding in fundamentals that way. Postgres is the most rigid of the systems, in that it usually has a smaller number of well-defined ways to do something. -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary and imaginative work need not end up well. --Dennis Ritchie
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Robert11 wrote: > Hello: > > Am about to sign up for an on-line database course (introductory) > > Apparently, one must have on their PC for the course either > > Access > postgre > mysql > > Am really new at this. > Access is a problem, as the package costs is $200.00 Wow ! > > I downloaded postgre, but I am a bit stumped on > what to do next. > The problem is I'm totally unfamiliar with ftp downloads. > > There are a bunch of folders. There should be one master folder named something like postgresql-7.4.2 cd into that directory, and read the INSTALL file. Basically, you'll need to do: ./configure make make install to install postgresql, then you'll need to run initdb as the postgres super user and start the database. It's not that hard, really, just take your time. > I would like to evaluate postgre and mysql before the course actually > starts. > > Also: what are the major differences between all 3 packages ? Access is a single user database system designed for simple databases. MySQL is a very simple database server designed for speed with one or two users. Postgresql is a full featured relational database server in the same class as Oracle or db2 in terms of performance, scaling, and features. > Which would be easiest to learn for a true database beginner ? MySQL is easier to learn, but it teaches you bad habits. Access is pretty easy, but also has some quirks. Postgresql is likely the hardest to learn, but the most rewarding once you know it. It is likely to be able to "take you further" than the other two. > Should perhaps I go with Access despite the cost ? Is it "easier", or are > the screens and interface 'better" ? Just easier for a beginner. The basic concepts of database don't get easier to understand with any of the products, because the understanding is the hard part, not the UI of the database. > Want to learn one database fairly well, as I think it's something I should > know, and would also look good on a job resume. Learn Postgresql, it will take you farther (Oracle, db2, etc... will come easier to you if you learn postgresql.)
Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Access is not a real SQL database, but it has some SQL interface > glued onto it. What do you mean by "real SQL database"? Would you call MySQL a real SQL database? I think Access is as real as MySQL in terms of being a SQL database; it even has things like subselect long before MySQL does. SQL _is_ an interface, after all... -- dave
On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 10:17:08AM +0700, David Garamond wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> >Access is not a real SQL database, but it has some SQL interface
> >glued onto it.
>
> What do you mean by "real SQL database"? Would you call MySQL a real SQL
> database? I think Access is as real as MySQL in terms of being a SQL
> database; it even has things like subselect long before MySQL does.
Access doesn't explicitly have as one of its goals SQL conformance.
It has some features of real databases, yes, but its support of SQL
really only goes as far as what's convenient. (Maybe things have
changed since the last time I looked at Access, which was Access 97.
But my impression then, and from what I've read about it since, is
that its native support for SQL is just good enough to make you
realise you need SQL server.) MySQL says it is committed to
implementing the ANSI standards.
Anyway, what I really think about all of this is that you could learn
good database design with more or less any database, if you worked at
it. Some systems are just better at enforcing the rules for you.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.
--Roger Brinner