On 07/22/2012 12:44 PM, Rich Braun wrote:
For those of us lacking a 57-minute attention span to watch a full-length
talk, what's the gist of Rob Conery's argument? For many, I suppose
PostgreSQL is a "default choice" but that isn't the case for most of the
open-source tools I've used in the past 10 years. I'm now on a project for
which the default choice would have been Oracle, but the software architect
has chosen MySQL as a cost-saving alternative.
Why was this architect wrong?
The problem with architecture is that there are both art and engineering
components, which brings it into the realm of subjectivity.
Choosing MySQL is generally a bad decision, but widely regarded as safe.
A lot of people use MySQL standing with the crowd allows you a good
defence when things go wrong .... and they always go wrong, everything
from Oracle to MSSQL to Sybase to MySQL to PostgreSQL will eventually
have an issue. Its true.
Databases like Oracle, PostgreSQL, and MSSQL represent man-centuries of
research and development. Disregarding them is the act of fools.
I may tell you, MySQL is a bad database because of X, Y, and Z, but that
doesn't really help you. Watch the first 15 minutes of the video for a
taste. Do some personal research and really really learn about
"databases," more than the minimum you need to use them. Once you
understand the reasoning of why Oracle uses redo logs and PostgreSQL
uses WAL, our opinions won't matter.
-rich
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@blu.org
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
