Thread: postgres vs mysql conventional wisdom
On this first day of the month, I thought it might be interesting to re-visit the conventional wisdom about postgres vs mysql. Do these seem like fair observations? Storage engines - Advantage Postgres for having far more available. Postgre has such a wide range of storage engines to choose from -- ranging from whatever proprietary backend Yahoo uses, to Fujitsu's proprietary storage engine; to PowerGres Plus's proprietary storage engine; to Netezza's hardware accelerated storage engine. In contrast, MySQL only has a few to choose from. Broad Developer base - Advantage MySQL for having a more distributed team. Postgres developers seem to be concentrated in a handful of companies. After various acquisitions, MySQL developers are scattered to the four winds. Large company support - Advantage Postgres for having larger companies support it. Fujitsu ($46 billion 2009 revenue; 185,000 employees) much bigger than that little company that bought whomever bought MySQL ($23 billion revenue; 73000 employees). Any more?
On 1 April 2010 12:21, Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> wrote:
You mean EnterpriseDB, Red Hat, F-Secure, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant, PostgreSQL Experts, Redpill, Credativ, Afilias, End Point, Google, NTT but to name a few?
Broad Developer base - Advantage MySQL for having a more distributed team.
Postgres developers seem to be concentrated in a handful of companies.
After various acquisitions, MySQL developers are scattered to the four winds.
You mean EnterpriseDB, Red Hat, F-Secure, Command Prompt, 2nd Quadrant, PostgreSQL Experts, Redpill, Credativ, Afilias, End Point, Google, NTT but to name a few?