Wow! This has been a fun thread -- just what I need after a long day of ERP work :)
First off, I'm a *big* MySQL fan. That said, there is a limited range of things it's good for. Same for Oracle. Same for MSSQL, etc. Got a few comments though: > Funny how the most expensive solution (Oracle) and the least expensive > (MySQL) performed so closely :) If you look at the methodology of the eWeek study (a link that seems to have been removed since I first read the article), you'll find a lot of fine print: 1) MySQL techs tuned the database for performance (all vendors were offered that option, I only remember MySQL taking them up. If someone can find the link I'm missing to the methodology, please correct me!) 2) MySQL used *in-memory* db-caching. No wonder that was fast! Of course you'd have to write that layer in another db so it certainly is a plus. Also note this is MySQL 4.01. When they turned off in memory, "performance dropped by two thirds" according to the article. Equal to Oracle only when MySQL is running in-memory... 3) The MSSQL JDBC driver was the limiting factor in their tests. They choose to use a 3rd party driver for MySQL (a good one, but they say there is no official MySQL driver -- that's BS, though maybe not at the time -- there's a Connector\J for Java) -- why not for MSSQL? The Merant driver or JTurbo are far better. 4) The app they used -- the "standard" Niles app, doesn't used stored procs. If it was designed for that, MySQL would be dead out of the door. That said, the fact they *did* do some benchmarking is great. But quite honestly, it's a little like saying "Hey, I benchmarked this ASP app and this Java app and this CF app and CF kicks butt." but then reading in the fine print something like "We configured ASP and Java ourselves, but had Ben Forta and Dave Watts come configure CF for performance". I mean the MySQL guys did things like change the database engine *per table*, which is admittedly cool! But the test took advantage of some pretty advanced MySQL (in memory caching, per-table engine selection) yet used crappy MSSQL JDBC drivers and no stored procs on dbs that supported them. So on to the good things. MySQL can be useful as a moderate-sized datawarehouse -- it's fast, it doesn't need referential integrity assuming it's a read-only data store, and the price is right. It's also perfect to package with web applications that are standalone -- things like bug-tracking systems, blog systems, etc. And I've got to say, the new tools for the MySQL AB guys are great -- the free enterprise manager clone is, while obviously not finished, much easier than the strange GUI tools that used to pass for management tools. The JDBC driver is amazingly fast. Transactions are (finally) a clear win. And the certification program's not a bad idea. It's not all *that* long ago that the big bonus for MSSQL was enterprise manager, and then replication. Management tools are what makes the noticable difference between MSSQL 6.5 and 7 and 2000 (well, and performance). Regards, John Paul Ashenfelter CTO/Transitionpoint [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paris Lundis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 5:57 PM Subject: Re: WOT: MySQL in the Enterprise > Well I can't say I am enterprise.. even if I have a few tables with a > couple of million rows of data... > > Checkout the MySQL site and see their consulting arm... I remember when > I first started considering MySQL, their then cleint list and > datawarehouse size was quite large.. fairly impressive amount of data... > > A lot of people are bound to bring up the SQL compliance issue and lack > of robust SQL fancy database query stuff... The eWeek article was right > on I think about performance... having used both.... > > Your mileage will vary based on the nature of what you are doing of > course... > > Paris Lundis > Founder > Areaindex, L.L.C. > http://www.areaindex.com > http://www.pubcrawler.com > 412-292-3135 > [finding the future in the past, passing the future in the present] > [connecting people, places and things] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Scott Mulholland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 17:53:26 -0500 > Subject: WOT: MySQL in the Enterprise > > > I am researching the use of MySQL in use with enterprise level > > applications, looking for feedback both good and bad. > > I have read all the articles on the mySQL site, as well as the manual > > and the eWeek article comparing it with Oracle. > > > > Anyone on this list using it currently and have any success/horror > > stories or stats? > > > > TIA, > > Scott > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
