just wanted to add another category of comparison: mysql is fast, reliable and scalable. that's a fact! we don't need to discuss this anymore. BUT: the sql-set is too limited for most of the real use cases out there. just think of the missing sub-selects or multitable-updates/deletes or stored procedures. i worked with m$ sqlserver and oracle for years and i really miss these features in mysql. i am looking forward to see version 4.x having these things.
mysql rocks and oracle is really expensive :) so i continue using mysql for almost all projects. cheers, pero > -----Original Message----- > From: john [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:25 PM > To: MySQL Lists > Subject: RE: MySQL Power ? > > > For what a newbies opinion may matter, > > I breifly worked with Oracle, and am working with MySQL. Fact, as it may > be, I will never look for or take a job where they are using the P.O.S. > Oracle. Oracle is not stable enough, it bombs if you make one misleading > query. MySQL just says "eh, try again". Heaven forbid you want to call a > memory stack in Oracle and puipe the results to the db, and if you do, you > had better have all of your ducks squared away, you can ever so easily > corrupt the database if you don't. Oracle doesn't have enough intuition > either. > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: MySQL Power ? > > > > > I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... > > > > Can MySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load > > ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other > > database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too > basic > > for these capabilities? > > > > Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that > is > > raging! > > I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. > > However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest > volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL > is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply > that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify > the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it > can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high > read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads > - I think). > > (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) > > Alec Cawley > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Before posting, please check: > http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) > http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Before posting, please check: > http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) > http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) > > To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
