Félix Beltrán wrote:
> Does any one know how PostgreSQL compares to MySQL regarding stability
> and maintenance?
>
> I have been using MySQL for about two years, and it has proved to be
> very stable and requires almost zero maintenance.
It really depends on what you are using it for. Stability is a relative
concept. I use MySQL to hold the bayesian and auto-whitelist data for
my Spamassassin server. I find it extremely reliable and low
maintenance in that capacity. I use PostgreSQL as the backend for my
version control system and I find it extremely reliable in that
function. Does that mean they are equally stable? Perhaps it does, as
long as you stick to using PostgreSQL and MySQL for the roles they are
each best suited for. There is no way I'd reverse the roles of my
database servers, though. I wouldn't use PostgreSQL for Spamassassin's
bayesian tables any more than I would use a combine to mow my lawn. I
also wouldn't use MySQL for my VCS any more than I'd try to take a
lawnmower to a wheat field.
I honestly don't see that there is much difference in them from a
stability and maintainability point of view. I do see there being a
fairly large difference in them from a scope and functionality point of
view.
The gap is closing, though. MySQL is getting more enterprise features
and PostgreSQL is getting better in the "lean and mean" department. I
expect that the differences functionality-wise will continue to blur. I
expect that each will continue to edge out the other in their current
respective fortes. This is, however, getting a little astray from the
original question.
Kurt.
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
