Re: mysql....postgres
mySQL vs postgreSQL?!?! check this out http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim2705.php3?page=1 ;) From: Brett W. McCoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: nafiseh saberi [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: mysqlpostgres Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:57:41 -0500 (EST) On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, nafiseh saberi wrote: why do you use always mysql and not postgres ?? I use PostgreSQL myself, have since like 1997 or so. -- Brett http://www.chapelperilous.net/ Booze is the answer. I don't remember the question. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: mysql....postgres
Oracle is How many inserts/second are you taking about? -Original Message- From: Curtis Poe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 3:52 PM To: Etienne Marcotte Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: mysqlpostgres --- Etienne Marcotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MySQL is about speed, unless you do tons of inserts and absolutely can't afford table locking, go with mysql.. Regrettably, we do have to handle tons of inserts, so this is problematic. The software that we're evaluating databases for offers complete B-B-C support for an entire industry, so we may be forced to take a look at Oracle, too. Cheers, Curtis Ovid Poe = Senior Programmer Onsite! Technology (http://www.onsitetech.com/) Ovid on http://www.perlmonks.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: mysql....postgres
--- Mike Gargiullo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oracle is How many inserts/second are you taking about? If anyone would like to follow-up on this, it might be better to email me directly rather than continue this very off-topic thread :) I don't know how many inserts per second. We're working in the dark, here. We have a product that has been relatively successful in keeping our client's costs down, so we now have a particular industry association which has said that if we develop the next phase of our product, they're going to market it to their manufacturers and dealers. We already have some very large industry players who've come to us telling us that they're on board as soon as we finish it. Unfortunately, this requires a complete revamping of the way we handle inventory for them, but it earns us a mind-boggling revenue stream if we can deliver and if they follow through on their commitment. Since this allows manufacturers and retailers to have POS, inventory management, e-commerce, real-time site customization and a true client-server architecture (rather than being forced to rely solely on a Web-based system) we have a rather large database that is still growing. I just can't recommend migrating from MS SQL Server unless I get better information on the databases under consideration. MySQL just won't cut it. Postgres looks interesting, but I just haven't found enough evidence that it will really handle what we need. Hence, Oracle looks like a promising choice. Side note: MS SQL Server has been a huge bottleneck for us because our DBA didn't know it very well (he has been fired) and it keeps crashing, often taking down the box with it. We have some insite as to why it's been failing, but it's such a pain in the rear, that we're sick of it. Plus, we can't run it on Linux. Cheers, Curtis Ovid Poe = Senior Programmer Onsite! Technology (http://www.onsitetech.com/) Ovid on http://www.perlmonks.org/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mysql....postgres
* Kiarash Em. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [11 Dec 2001 06:29]: mySQL vs postgreSQL?!?! check this out http://www.phpbuilder.com/columns/tim2705.php3?page=1 ;) Hmm. Seems rather out of date wrt postgres. 8kb rows? Is that of data? Because postgres quite happily has field types that allow arbitrary blobs of text or data. I'd probably say that anyone who hits data limits like that has some issues with the design of their database itself rather than the DBMS. The article is also somewhat self-contradictory: Postgres is making headway in the performance and stability departments. MySQL loses points in the long-term stability department. Postgres will run smoothly for extended periods of time without trouble. When it comes to transactions: Finally, for the hardest-core developers, Postgres could be pretty slick. Foreign keys, views, subselects, and transactions can all be pretty cool -- if you need them and you will make any use of them. If you don't need them or won't use them, then you're probably better off with MySQL and its superior performance. But on the PG page it raves about transactions. For some reason the author doesn't recommend you investigate transactions. Then again, I ran MySQL for a year, Oracle for a year and have been running PostgreSQL for half a year so far. MySQL was irritating due to its lack of subqueries and transactions (a somewhat half-baked table type is now available that supports transactions, rather than it being part of the core of the DBMS, plus, is it actually release quality yet?). Plus it would frequently decide to not handle a query for no apparent reason. Oracle was too large and complex for my purposes. I wasn't willing to spend the amount of time and effort needed to properly configure and administer it. Go for Oracle if you have a dedicated DBA and need its features. It's a good program, just worthy of the Sledgehammer award. PostgreSQL offers appropriate speed, transactions and fkeys. The majority of my websites use multiple tables in their database design. Assorted pages update data as necessary and this data needs to be reflected in multiple tables. Thus, transactions are superb. I can do the operations and if any of them fail, I can just rollback, rather than trying to do them all backwards. PostgreSQL and its transactions are stable and well worth the effort of initially learning. All part of the Laziness that Larry talks about. You can either do it all manually, and thus not necessarily properly, or you can spend initial effort learning about transactions and have it pay off in the amount of time you recoup later. cheers, -- iain. http://eh.org/~koschei/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mysql....postgres
nafiseh saberi menulis pd tgl 06 December 2001 Thursday 06:29 pm sbb: :: hi dear team... :: :: why do you use always mysql and :: not postgres ?? Not always use mysql, I use Postgres for my database. Regards, Djoko Priyono www.dnet.net.id :: :: thx for your time. :: :: Best regards. Nafiseh Saberi ::www.iraninfocenter.net :: www.sorna.net :: Beaty is in the eye of the beholder. :: _ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mysql....postgres
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, nafiseh saberi wrote: why do you use always mysql and not postgres ?? I use PostgreSQL myself, have since like 1997 or so. -- Brett http://www.chapelperilous.net/ Booze is the answer. I don't remember the question. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mysql....postgres
In article 000801c17e49$4a172df0$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nafiseh Saberi) wrote: why do you use always mysql and not postgres ?? who said nobody uses postgresql? -- brian d foy [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Perl services for hire CGI Meta FAQ - http://www.perl.org/CGI_MetaFAQ.html Troubleshooting CGI scripts - http://www.perl.org/troubleshooting_CGI.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
