If you're going with MySQL, it's also worth taking a look at MariaDB and 
Percona Server. They're both drop-in replacement forks of MySQL with an 
emphasis on performance, plus they both have additional features that are 
pretty handy.

Jarin

On Saturday, November 22, 2014 9:34:15 PM UTC-8, Ian Young wrote:
>
> Chris,
>  
> I think there's a kernel of truth in what you're saying. Guyren points out 
> a whole bunch of extra stuff that Postgres adds to the SQL experience, and 
> if you want that bonus material it's clearly superior. For most of us, most 
> projects, most of the time, there's no need to step outside the bounds of 
> standard SQL, and in that scenario, MySQL and Postgres have more in common 
> than they do apart. Both are stable & mature & well-supported, both won't 
> lose your data through any fault of their own, both are fast enough that 
> you're limited much more by disk read speed and the quality of your indexes 
> than by the database itself.
>  
> Even in these situations, MySQL does have some distinct flaws. It has some 
> poor engineering decisions in its history that follow it around, and many 
> of the default settings on a MySQL install are things that you won't notice 
> at first and then will regret deeply later on. The ones I can think of off 
> the top of my head:
>  
>  * It uses MyISAM as the default storage engine (though apparently in 
> newer versions this has changed). MyISAM is a shitty storage engine that 
> uses a dumb file format and lacks some important features like 
> transactions. There's a much better InnoDB storage engine available, but if 
> you don't know to switch to that out of the gate, migrating after the fact 
> is a huge pain.
>  
>  * There are something  like 5 different places to set the string encoding 
> (i.e. Latin1 vs UTF8). These settings apply at different points in the 
> pipeline, are very hard to track down and understand, and worse, they can 
> be set in conflicting ways and will proceed to interact with each other in 
> mind-boggling ways. Oh, and last I checked MySQL defaults to Latin1, which 
> is something that you never ever want when starting a green-field DB in 
> this day and age.
>  
>  * It does some terrible and bizarre things with type casting values (the 
> details escape me at the moment).
>  
>  * Table names are case-insensitive on Windows & OSX, and case-sensitive 
> on Linux. Arrrrrrrrrrgh.
>  
> All these things *can* be mitigated, and if you're careful in how you 
> configure and use MySQL, it's not going to sink your company. So if you 
> have a compelling reason *to* use MySQL, I say go for it. But if you lack a 
> strong argument for MySQL, why invite all these problems into your project 
> for no reason? I suggest you consider Postgres the default choice, and 
> require a convincing reason to make an exception for MySQL (or any other DB 
> option).
>  
> Ian
>  
>  
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014, at 06:47 PM, Chris Schulte wrote:
>
> Guyren,
>  
> Do you have a similar link explaining why Postgres is superior to MySQL? I 
> know Postgres has all the momentum now in the developer community, but I 
> can't seem to find any extremely compelling reason why it's held in such 
> high regard over MySQL (other than the whole evil corporate Oracle owns 
> MySQL thing).
>  
> Most of the research I've done comes to the conclusion that they're 
> basically the same, so if you have 10+ years of experience with one then 
> just stick with it. But that doesn't explain why every developer I meet 
> turns his/her nose up at the mere suggestion of using MySQL. 
>  
> So if you've got some good links I'd appreciate it if you could pass them 
> along and convince me otherwise. I just haven't heard any reason yet that's 
> convinced me to make the switch. 
>  
> --
> Chris
>  
>  
> On Friday, November 21, 2014, Guyren Howe <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> wrote:
>
> I’ve not worked with it nearly as much as MySQL or Postgres. But seems I 
> can now be almost as harsh about MS SQL Server as I have been about MySQL:
>  
>
> <http://www.pg-versus-ms.com/>
>  
> That just leaves Oracle. I *have* worked a goodly amount with Oracle. 
> Oracle is significantly better than SQL Server and MySQL. And I can even 
> imagine situations where I would choose Oracle over Postgres. Were I to 
> describe such a situation, I would begin with something like “well, I 
> suppose if I was working for a bank…”.
>  
> For everyone else, Postgres is clearly, I will even say outrageously, 
> obviously, and dramatically, the best database available today.
>  
> On related news, I’m currently working on some tests of Postgres’ special 
> indexes for the next meeting. The GIN index has just received a dramatic 
> improvement in Postgres 9.4 (both smaller and faster). I’m planning on 
> presenting results giving an indication about when you might want to use 
> GIN or GIST indexes. For those who saw my last presentation about indexes, 
> compound GIN and GIST indexes let the database use any of the columns in 
> the index for a search. They are rather more complex than BTree for the 
> database to maintain, so this involves a tradeoff between insert and query 
> time that ought to be explored in more depth.
>  
> I’m planning on running some benchmarks that will give us at least a rough 
> idea of how GIN and GIST indexes compare for insert and query time against 
> BTree indexes. If you use Postgres, you should come hear what I find out.
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>
> -- 
> -- 
> SD Ruby mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "SD Ruby" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> -- 
> -- 
> SD Ruby mailing list
> [email protected] <javascript:>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "SD Ruby" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>  
>  

-- 
-- 
SD Ruby mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SD 
Ruby" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to