On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 10:39 -0400, Ted Roche wrote: > >Paul Lussier wrote: > > > It is lacking features[1][2], and I've certainly seen plenty (if not most) > > uses of MySQL completely abuse it to the point where the "developer" > > completely missed the "R" point RDB[3]. > > Most programmers are amateurs. Even the really, really good ones. > Business application programmers follow the same normal curve as most > everything else: few really, really good ones, few really, really bad > ones, but the bad ones leave such memorable disasters behind them! > > More fuel for the fire... Josh Berkus blogs, > > "What is does show is that PostgreSQL and MySQL are very, very close in > performance today and the outdated belief that MySQL is somehow multiple > times faster than PostgreSQL is dramatically misplaced. Users should be > picking a database based on which specific performance features, and > other features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant > assessment that "Database X is way faster." That's pretty much been true > for years, but the very close benchmark results shows that pretty clearly." > > Source: > http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/benchmark-brouhaha-17939 > > Competition is Good.
In my experience, key reasons to choose MySQL are: replication - it is easy to feed changes to remote servers without the uptime requirements of two-phase commits easy administration As a DBMS, it requires more planning in developing an application simply because of its differences from the competition and the lack of commit/rollback in its myisam tables. -- Lloyd Kvam Venix Corp _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/