Mailing List Archive

<<I have just made my decision to use MySQL for a major project that was
still up in the air.>>

Interesting. By contrast, today's discussion has tilted my opinion away
from MySQL and toward PostgreSQL, at least for larger projects. Not because
MySQL is suppposedly dying (I know better than that), but because of the
comparison results reported by unbiased parties.

Oh, well, that's the beauty of choice. This debate will probably never die
out. I'm still interested in hearing of anyone else's experiences with one
or the other working with Interchange-especially if they have tried both.

-- Warren


-----Original Message-----
From: interchange-users-admin@lists.akopia.com
[mailto:interchange-users-admin@lists.akopia.com] On Behalf Of Mike Heins
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 1:01 PM
To: interchange-users@lists.akopia.com
Subject: Re: [ic] Rumors of MySQL demise greatly exaggerated ... (was:
postgres vs mysql)

Quoting Michael Widenius (monty@mysql.com):
> For many of the applications MySQL is used today, PostgreSQL is in
> practice way too slow! I also know of situations where PostgreSQL is
> faster than MySQL, but this is a little beside the point; The simple
> truth is that there is a need for many different databases and neither
> MySQL nor PostgreSQL can be best for all of these.
>

There you have it from the horses mouth. Monty is, of course, the creator
and lead developer for MySQL. It is doing well and will be so for many
moons to come. And I have just made my decision to use MySQL for a major
project that was still up in the air. 8-)

Best,
Mike
--
Akopia, Inc., 131 Willow Lane, Floor 2, Oxford, OH 45056
phone +1.513.523.7621 fax 7501 <heins@akopia.com>

People who want to share their religious views with you
almost never want you to share yours with them. -- Dave Barry

_______________________________________________
Interchange-users mailing list
Interchange-users@lists.akopia.com
http://lists.akopia.com/mailman/listinfo/interchange-users

Quoting Warren Odom (warren-odom@stenocall.com):
> <<I have just made my decision to use MySQL for a major project that was
> still up in the air.>>
>
> Interesting. By contrast, today's discussion has tilted my opinion away
> from MySQL and toward PostgreSQL, at least for larger projects. Not because
> MySQL is suppposedly dying (I know better than that), but because of the
> comparison results reported by unbiased parties.

Well, I believe Monty from my own experience, and nothing I have seen
has led me to believe Postgres is faster for most applications. I always
look with a bit of a jaundiced eye on benchmarks that only discuss
server-farm-type loads. Face it, most of us don't have 100,000 unique
visitors a day to our web site.

Some of the things I like about MySQL for Interchange applications
are 1) easy to configure, 2) has the fast searchable text type and 3)
ALTER TABLE is very intelligent and makes structuring data a snap. That
is a big plus when designing systems that can have widely varying data.
Most anything I work on is used by multiple companies, and it is difficult
to design a one-size-fits-all set of handcuffs. 8-)

The database-independence of Interchange makes it quite easy to port
from one DB to another. If you can get the data transferred, for the
most part Interchange can use it. So if you want to use Postgres, and
you are building around something we at Akopia created with Interchange,
you should find it very easy to switch -- at least for a value of easy
that is much greater than with most applications.

If writing a one-application program (like an ERP-linked system that
requires a large programmer investment) I would probably now use Postgres
or Oracle. But for the more general case I usually am involved in,
MySQL is much, much, easier to deal with.

--
Akopia, Inc., 131 Willow Lane, Floor 2, Oxford, OH 45056
phone +1.513.523.7621 fax 7501 <heins@akopia.com>

Friends don't let friends use Outlook. -- Bob Blaylock

> or Oracle. But for the more general case I usually am involved in,
> MySQL is much, much, easier to deal with.

I can only disagree. I tried to implement a system that was written with
MySQL. Even a little security settings was way too complicated to do, and
even the experts I asked that had been using MySQL for years gave up.

So for me it's simple. MySQL is too difficult to use and doesn't provide
enough in features. They claim to be very fast, but it's really only proven
on simple, single-table benchmarks.

And on the topic of benchmark, even Microsoft claims that MS SQL server is
the fastest thing out there,backed by benchmarks. I don't believe I ever saw
a db without any benchmark telling its the fastest.

--
Kaare Rasmussen --Linux, spil,-- Tlf: 3816 2582
Kaki Data tshirts, merchandize Fax: 3816 2501
Howitzvej 75 Åben 14.00-18.00 Email: kar@webline.dk
2000 Frederiksberg Lørdag 11.00-17.00 Web: www.suse.dk

I appreciate your insights on this topic, Mike. (And from others too, such
as Kaare.) Due to the continuing discussion, I took the extra step of
reading the article Dan suggested
(http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim20000705.php3?page=1&print_mode=1).
It's very objective and I highly recommend it. It's actually more
complimentary of MySQL than Dan had implied. After reading that, and the
other comments in this discussion, I have a much clearer picture of when to
use one or the other database. This is a question I've been wrestling with
for a long time. Thanks again to everyone.

-- Warren


-----Original Message-----
From: interchange-users-admin@lists.akopia.com
[mailto:interchange-users-admin@lists.akopia.com] On Behalf Of Mike Heins
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 2:19 PM
To: interchange-users@lists.akopia.com
Subject: Re: [ic] Rumors of MySQL demise greatly exaggerated ... (was:
postgres vs mysql)

Quoting Warren Odom (warren-odom@stenocall.com):
> <<I have just made my decision to use MySQL for a major project that was
> still up in the air.>>
>
> Interesting. By contrast, today's discussion has tilted my opinion away
> from MySQL and toward PostgreSQL, at least for larger projects. Not
because
> MySQL is suppposedly dying (I know better than that), but because of the
> comparison results reported by unbiased parties.

Well, I believe Monty from my own experience, and nothing I have seen
has led me to believe Postgres is faster for most applications. I always
look with a bit of a jaundiced eye on benchmarks that only discuss
server-farm-type loads. Face it, most of us don't have 100,000 unique
visitors a day to our web site.

Some of the things I like about MySQL for Interchange applications
are 1) easy to configure, 2) has the fast searchable text type and 3)
ALTER TABLE is very intelligent and makes structuring data a snap. That
is a big plus when designing systems that can have widely varying data.
Most anything I work on is used by multiple companies, and it is difficult
to design a one-size-fits-all set of handcuffs. 8-)

The database-independence of Interchange makes it quite easy to port
from one DB to another. If you can get the data transferred, for the
most part Interchange can use it. So if you want to use Postgres, and
you are building around something we at Akopia created with Interchange,
you should find it very easy to switch -- at least for a value of easy
that is much greater than with most applications.

If writing a one-application program (like an ERP-linked system that
requires a large programmer investment) I would probably now use Postgres
or Oracle. But for the more general case I usually am involved in,
MySQL is much, much, easier to deal with.

--
Akopia, Inc., 131 Willow Lane, Floor 2, Oxford, OH 45056
phone +1.513.523.7621 fax 7501 <heins@akopia.com>

Friends don't let friends use Outlook. -- Bob Blaylock

_______________________________________________
Interchange-users mailing list
Interchange-users@lists.akopia.com
http://lists.akopia.com/mailman/listinfo/interchange-users