On 22 Aug 2003 06:45:21 -0700, (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
On the other hand, if you wanna be able to ask a question on a general
mailing list, the MySQL community is probably ten times the size of
the PostgreSQL community, and more applications have been written that
presume MySQL's quirky
Peter == Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter On 22 Aug 2003 06:45:21 -0700, (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:
On the other hand, if you wanna be able to ask a question on a general
mailing list, the MySQL community is probably ten times the size of
the PostgreSQL community, and more
Any real life experience with Firebird (the database) I'd love to hear
about.
Hi,
I've used 'Firebird' in its previous incarnation as 'Interbase'.
Although things have no doubt moved on, here are some of my experiences
with Interbase.
I was contracted to speed up an ad
Toby Corkindale wrote about SQLite:
Transactions, sort-of, in that you get them within a single query; but there's
poor support for simultaneous-request stuff.
Hmm. To my mind that's more like not than sort-of. It's confusing
enough evaluating packages, without people making stuff up, or being
Dominic Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about Firebird?
http://firebird.sourceforge.net/
does anyone here have personal experience? On paper (well, online) it
compares favorably to PostgreSQL, and it can be easily embedded.
It's an excellent
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about Firebird?
http://firebird.sourceforge.net/
does anyone here have personal experience? On paper (well, online) it
compares favorably to PostgreSQL, and it can be easily embedded.
It's an excellent browser, much quicker than mozilla on
Tony Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 03:30:48PM +0100, Andy Ford wrote:
Well thanks for summing that up - it was an interesting read!!
Currently I use mySQL only and don't really need transactional stuff.
Now triggers I can see a need for!!
Triggers at the db level
Roger Burton West [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 08:51:49PM +0100, Colin Magee wrote:
So this SQLite seems like a great idea IF it makes setting up and
administering a dbase simple. Unfortunately I just looked up where I can
download it, but didn't see any example code
At 09:03 + 8/23/03, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Tony Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unchecked they lead to an unmaintainable mess quicker than most other
things can ...
Many people say the same thing about perl code in general. Like all
tools you need to know when to say no. At the moment,
2003 22:58
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] SQL woes
On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 08:51:49PM +0100, Colin Magee wrote:
So this SQLite seems like a great idea IF it makes setting up and
administering a dbase simple. Unfortunately I just looked up where I can
download it, but didn't see any
Thanks - I did see the module on CPAN but wan't sure if I only needed the
one download. What I can't see there (or at the SQLite site) is a nice
example which shows creates, updates and queries a dbase. If I look at the
books I've got which show the DBI working with MySQL, can I simply
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Colin Magee wrote:
As a Perl beginner who has realised I need to set up a database, I have to
add that I immediately went for MySQL due to all the attention it seems to
have, and bought a few books to get me started. The whole thing - using
installing etc etc looks
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jason Clifford
Sent: 23 August 2003 12:02
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [OT] SQL woes
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Colin Magee wrote:
As a Perl beginner who has realised I need to set up a database, I have to
add that I immediately went for MySQL
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Colin Magee wrote:
What Linux distro are you running?
SuSE 8.1. As I say, I can see the files installed in usr/bin, as root, but
when I try running it I get all sorts of error messages:
1.Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket
What Linux distro are you running?
SuSE 8.1. As I say, I can see the files installed in usr/bin, as
root, but
when I try running it I get all sorts of error messages:
'it' being the server or the client?
1. Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket
/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock. Try
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 05:59:01PM +0100, Colin Magee wrote:
SuSE 8.1. As I say, I can see the files installed in usr/bin, as root, but
when I try running it I get all sorts of error messages:
1.Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket
/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock. Try checking
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Many people say the same thing about perl code in general. Like all
tools you need to know when to say no. At the moment, we're just
using triggers to put an mtime field onto all of our rows, and this
works well. But I'd want to think carefully about more advanced uses.
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, David Cantrell wrote:
Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Many people say the same thing about perl code in general. Like all
tools you need to know when to say no. At the moment, we're just
using triggers to put an mtime field onto all of our rows, and this
works well. But
What are the advantages of PostgreSQl over mySQL
I currently use mySQL everywhere and it works well - at least for what I
need it for!!
Andy
On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 16:12, Toby Corkindale wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 06:03:13PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:51:13AM
Toby Corkindale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 06:03:13PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:51:13AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
(And people who use MySQL wonder what the value of subselects are! :)
Subselects are in MySQL 4.1 (currently alpha).
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:54:22AM +0100, Andy Ford wrote:
What are the advantages of PostgreSQl over mySQL
The first few advantages that come to mind:
It scales. :D
It supports (several varieties of) transactions.
It can write internally consistent backup dumps.
It supports
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:54:22AM +0100, Andy Ford wrote:
What are the advantages of PostgreSQl over mySQL
The first few advantages that come to mind:
It scales. :D
It supports (several varieties of) transactions.
It can write internally consistent backup dumps.
It supports
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Nigel Hamilton wrote:
And one day when I can afford a cluster I'm hoping to implement the MySQL
DB replication Hack (outlined in Linux Server Hacks) to distribute parts
of the database onto the nodes.
I'm using that and it works beautifully.
It'd also very easy to
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 16:12, Toby Corkindale wrote;
TC Ick. Have they got around to supporting transactions yet? :P
No, they're too dumb for that - but a company called InnoDB basically
re-wrote the core parts of MySQL and called it a storage back-end.
It's free and included in the MySQL
Andy Ford wrote:
What are the advantages of PostgreSQl over mySQL
I currently use mySQL everywhere and it works well - at least for what I
need it for!!
Hello Andy, and Perl M[ou]ngers.
IMHO, MySQL is the fastest database engine on the Open-Source and
Commercial markets.
On the other
From: Andy Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 8/22/03 8:54:22 AM
What are the advantages of PostgreSQl over mySQL
I currently use mySQL everywhere and it works well - at
least for what I need it for!!
MySQL is just a file-based storage system with a pseudo-SQL interface.
It doesn't support many
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:20:39AM -0700, Dave Cross wrote:
MySQL is just a file-based storage system with a pseudo-SQL interface.
It doesn't support many of the things that you'd expect in a
real SQL implementation, for example:
* Transactions
* Referential integrity
Innodb tables give
Luis == Luis Campos de Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
LuisIMHO, MySQL is the fastest database engine on the Open-Source and
Luis Commercial markets.
Only for a loose definition of database. Certainly not one with
transactions. When you move all your tables to InnoDB, the results
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Cross
Sent: 22 August 2003 14:21
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] SQL woes
MySQL is just a file-based storage system with a pseudo-SQL
interface. It doesn't support many
Randal == Randal L Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Randal MySQL is a fine junior SQL engine. But it really doesn't provide a
Randal way to enforce business rules in the engine - that was not its initial
Randal goal. And when data integrity is important, you want to ensure good
Randal
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:45:21AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
In conclusion, if you want a speedy ACID-compliant
enforced-business-rules database with full SQL support (not a subset),
PostgreSQL wins, and MySQL is still two or three years away.
On the other hand, if you wanna be able to
Richard == Richard Clamp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Richard On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:20:39AM -0700, Dave Cross wrote:
MySQL is just a file-based storage system with a pseudo-SQL interface.
It doesn't support many of the things that you'd expect in a
real SQL implementation, for example:
*
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 02:59:14PM +0100, Roger Burton West said:
On the third hand, if you want _real_ speed, _and_ transactions, but
none of the other neat stuff; and if your system doesn't have much in
the way of concurrent writes; SQLite is a whole lot easier to set up and
admin than
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 03:07:19PM +0100, Simon Wistow wrote:
[SQLite]
But suffers, IIRC, from concurrency problems.
On writing, yes. Hence doesn't have much in the way of concurrent
writes.
R
Randal L. Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MySQL is *just* now getting transactions. PostgreSQL has had some
very good experts working on transactions for years now, and they're
much further along on the trial-and-error curve that MySQL is just now
starting.
I'd just like to point out that
On Friday, August 22, 2003, at 11:28 am, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
Toby Corkindale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 06:03:13PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:51:13AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
(And people who use MySQL wonder what the value of
Well thanks for summing that up - it was an interesting read!!
Currently I use mySQL only and don't really need transactional stuff.
Now triggers I can see a need for!!
I may take a look at Pg
Thanks
Andy
On Fri, 2003-08-22 at 15:08, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
Richard == Richard Clamp [EMAIL
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Simon Wistow wrote:
So, to sum up this thread :
1. PostGres has some advantages
2. MySql has some advantages
3. Oracle has some advantages
4. SQLite has some advantages
5. All of the above have disadvantages.
6. There will be a film. At 11.
Which will be delayed for
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 05:13:31PM +0100, Jason Clifford wrote:
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003, Simon Wistow wrote:
So, to sum up this thread :
1. PostGres has some advantages
2. MySql has some advantages
3. Oracle has some advantages
4. SQLite has some advantages
5. All of the above have
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 02:59:14PM +0100, Roger Burton West wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:45:21AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
In conclusion, if you want a speedy ACID-compliant
enforced-business-rules database with full SQL support (not a subset),
PostgreSQL wins, and MySQL is still
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:45:21AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
MySQL is *just* now getting transactions. PostgreSQL has had some
very good experts working on transactions for years now, and they're
much further along on the trial-and-error curve that MySQL is just now
starting.
For
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 03:30:48PM +0100, Andy Ford wrote:
Well thanks for summing that up - it was an interesting read!!
Currently I use mySQL only and don't really need transactional stuff.
Now triggers I can see a need for!!
Triggers at the db level will bite you hard at some point.
If
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] SQL woes
On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 06:45:21AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
In conclusion, if you want a speedy ACID-compliant
enforced-business-rules database with full SQL support (not a subset),
PostgreSQL wins, and MySQL is still two or three years away
Dominic Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Randal L. Schwartz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MySQL is *just* now getting transactions. PostgreSQL has had some
very good experts working on transactions for years now, and they're
much further along on the trial-and-error curve that MySQL is just now
What about Firebird?
http://firebird.sourceforge.net/
does anyone here have personal experience? On paper (well, online) it
compares favorably to PostgreSQL, and it can be easily embedded.
richard
__
Bibliocraft Ltd / www.bibliocraft.com
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 06:03:13PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote:
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:51:13AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
(And people who use MySQL wonder what the value of subselects are! :)
Subselects are in MySQL 4.1 (currently alpha).
Toby Corkindale sent the following bits through the ether:
Ditto. Don't understand the hype around MySQL, personally.
People still use relational databases?
Leon
--
Leon Brocard.http://www.astray.com/
scribot.http://www.scribot.com/
Subject: [OT] SQL woes
It's at times like this I realise my SQL skills only cover the basics...
Mine too, but the problem could be that the '_' character in
MySQL represents a single character wildcard, so it might be
necessary to enclose your table and column names in backticks.
I
It's at times like this I realise my SQL skills only cover the basics...
I have two tables, 'user' and 'users_names'. I'm looking to deprecate
'users_names', so I've altered 'user' to now contain a 'user_realname'
column. Both tables have a column 'user_id', which correspond to each
other. I'd
On Sunday, August 17, 2003, 10:01:51 AM, Peter Sergeant wrote:
PS It's at times like this I realise my SQL skills only cover the basics...
PS I have two tables, 'user' and 'users_names'. I'm looking to deprecate
PS 'users_names', so I've altered 'user' to now contain a 'user_realname'
PS column.
is it not simply:
?
Apparently not.
mysql UPDATE user SET user.user_realname = users_names.name WHERE
user.user_id = users_names.user_id;
ERROR 1109: Unknown table 'users_names' in where clause
However, users_names definitely does exist. I'd speculate here, and, if
I'm wrong I'd appreciate
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003, Iain Tatch wrote:
On Sunday, August 17, 2003, 10:01:51 AM, Peter Sergeant wrote:
PS It's at times like this I realise my SQL skills only cover the basics...
PS I have two tables, 'user' and 'users_names'. I'm looking to deprecate
PS 'users_names', so I've altered
UPDATE user, user_names
Leading, it would seem to:
mysql UPDATE user, users_names SET user.user_realname =
users_names.name WHERE user.user_id = users_names.user_id;
ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near ' users_names SET
user.user_realname = users_names.name WHERE
Peter Sergeant wrote:
is it not simply:
?
Apparently not.
mysql UPDATE user SET user.user_realname = users_names.name WHERE
user.user_id = users_names.user_id;
ERROR 1109: Unknown table 'users_names' in where clause
However, users_names definitely does exist. I'd speculate here, and, if
I'm
Iain == Iain Tatch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Iain On Sunday, August 17, 2003, 10:01:51 AM, Peter Sergeant wrote:
PS It's at times like this I realise my SQL skills only cover the basics...
PS I have two tables, 'user' and 'users_names'. I'm looking to deprecate
PS 'users_names', so I've altered
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 09:51:13AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
(And people who use MySQL wonder what the value of subselects are! :)
Subselects are in MySQL 4.1 (currently alpha).
http://www.mysql.com/press/release_2003_05.html
I'd still say toss it and use PostgreSQL.
P
--
Paul
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003, Peter Sergeant wrote:
is it not simply:
?
Apparently not.
mysql UPDATE user SET user.user_realname = users_names.name WHERE
user.user_id = users_names.user_id;
ERROR 1109: Unknown table 'users_names' in where clause
However, users_names definitely does exist. I'd
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 11:23:32AM +0100, Peter Sergeant wrote:
mysql UPDATE user, users_names SET user.user_realname =
users_names.name WHERE user.user_id = users_names.user_id;
ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near ' users_names SET
user.user_realname = users_names.name
58 matches
Mail list logo
