At 4:27 PM -0400 8/1/01, Philip Mak wrote:
>On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Henrik Edlund wrote:
>
>> And while we are discussing "not cutting corners", those who still use
>> MySQL should switch to a real DBMS before they even think of abstracting
>> the SQL away from their Perl code.
>>
>> That people still use MySQL really shows how many lusers there are with
>> computers that try to develop real software. I said _try_.
>
>What would you consider to be a real DBMS? Sybase and Oracle obviously,
>but I actually am the hypothetical programmer with a 233MHz machine with
>64 MB RAM (hey, it runs emacs fine :/) on a shoestring budget who is
>mostly limited to using freeware tools.
>
>What about PostgreSQL and Interbase? Do those have the features of a
>'real' DBMS?
I use sequences. Therefore I need a real DBMS (either that or a rock
solid way of generating UNIQUE ids). Oracle and PostgreSQL have
great support for sequences. Sybase sucks from the standpoint of
sequences. It's almost impossible to write a conversion script for
Oracle sequences to Sybase (@@identity?) sequences without developing
a tumor... Same goes for MySQL (LAST_INSERTED_ID?).
There are things about Sybase and MySQL that I consider amazing.
Sybase is amazingly fast, even with many thousands of connections.
MySQL is blazingly fast for even large database (so long as you're
not doing any inserts). Over all though, I consider Oracle and
PostgreSQL the top in the Commercial and Free markets.
Rob
--
"A good magician never reveals his secret; the unbelievable trick
becomes simple and obvious once it is explained. So too with UNIX."
