Quoting robert_rowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I'm lead developer for a company that writes custom software for the mining > industry. We support MSSQL and MySQL. I've found that from a programming > aspect (VB + ADO) there is relatively little difference between MSSQL and > MySQL. There is some sight syntax differences and MySQL versions < 5.0 do not > support stored procedures. We use the InnoDB table type for MySQL as it > provides row level locking and transactions. Our largest client has about 1 > gig of data and averages 125 users. I've found that MySQL usua > lly out performs MSSQL if you tune it properly and use good programming > techniques. It is less integrated with Microsoft products though so if your > clients will be accessing the data via MS Office applications then MSSQL will > seem easier. We offer both platforms mainly because a lot of IT managers are > convinced that Microsoft solutions are the best even when benchmarks say > different. >
I admit to dome degree I am one of the IT Managers - the it 'sounds to good to be true' syndrome I suppose. But I'm coming around. The decision will be for MSSQL Server due to us using other MS products and the supporting of one product, but I'm interested for future reference when it does become an option (probably other jobs). As an aside, stored procedures seem to be a big thing with some people, namely the MS people I encounter (the ASP.NET mantra of using stored procedures for all databases access and even processing tasks), yet people seem to get along with them fine, until recently, in MySQL. This makes me thing they may not be the holy grail people say they are...in MySQL, until recently, all SQL must have been done at the code level rather than at the database server level - is that a major issue? Does it even provide some advantages? -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
