On 3/7/07, Paul DeCoursey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it really depends on the application. I don't think there is > any 1 database that could cover even 10% of the use cases.
really? Not even 10% eh. So in the server market, MySQL, Oracle, MsSQL dont cover the majority of use cases with huge overlap? I think the marketshare among those apps is well over 70 or 80% of the market. In desktop applications, that microsoft library Jet (I think is/was the name) used to have near 100% of the embedded app market. Of course I dont know what the state of that market is anymore. If they do > bundle a database it would have to be something small and easily > replaceable, because everyone will want to replace it, no matter what > it is. I think the exact opposite of what you say is true. These databases all do basically the same thing and whatever is bundled is what people use. For any of these choices the performance will be exellent in the context of a single user app, and almost *no one* will be motivated to customize. I can think of very few things that any of the real contenders couldnt do, that large numbers of people would want to do. In fact Jason Williams has kinda proved that by asking (twice) what specific benefits MySQL had and receiving *no* answers. Regards, Hank
