On Mar 16, 10:19 am, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > In article <fdjt28-flo....@wilbur.25thandclement.com>,
> >always recommend people to use PostgreSQL, though; which is superior in > >almost every way, especially the C client library and the wire protocol.) > > Can you point at a reference for the latter? I have been trying to > convince my company that PG is better than MySQL. > -- Well, my $.02 worth is that, about 3 yrs ago, on 5.0x-5.1x, I was truly appalled by the sheer level of stupidity displayed by MySQL's handling of a moderately complex UPDATE SQL query with a correlated subquery. (Let's say this was a 7 out of 10 complexity, with your standard selects being 1-3 max and a nightmare update query with all sorts of correlated subqueries would be a 9. I am first of all a database programmer, so queries are my world). Not only did MySQL mangle the query because it didn't understand what I was asking, it thrashed the data during the update and committed it. And, when I reviewed the query once again, I found I had mismatched parentheses, so it wasn't even syntaxically correct. Truly scary. DB2 + SQLBase punted for years on correlated subqueries Ex: "update ORDERS where x=y and exists (select 1 from ORDERS where <some condition>)". The DB2 engine doesn't know how to handle them, so it tells you to get lost. MySQL is not smart enough to recognize it's over its head and instead makes a best effort. To me it looks like a database that will get you 80% there and steadfastly refuse the last 20%, assuming you need really clever queries. PG was much cleaner in behavior, though a pain to install, especially on Windows. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list