RE: [expert] databases for linux
>Why not? At best its just a "compatibility" DLL that allows easier >migration between Unix and Windows. For specific applications you don't >need the full Cygwin install, though you do get a great set of tools >with it. I use Cygwin to allow a common build environment that works >seamlessly on Solaris, Linux and Windows/Cygwin. Didn't know you didn't need the full install, so I'll definitely give that a try in the future. I'd love to have a version of PG running on my windows partition. The full package is (as I remember) quite large, and not particularly friendly for those folks who are not Linux/unix friendly. It also seemed to run (how to put this) a little weird on my system, and that was enough to make me skeptical. The absolute killer for the app I am developing is that first part: there's no way I can put this out there and require folks to figure out cygwin and then postgres. Just ain't going to happen. But I'm not locking myself into windows - good god no! Banish the thought. I happen to be writing my application in PHP with an excellent database abstraction layer, so it will (theoretically) work on any supported platform, with any one of seven different databases, including Postgres. That's the open source way. :) >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Nick Thompson >Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 11:08 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >Why not? At best its just a "compatabilty" DLL that allows easier >migration between Unix and Windows. For specific applications you don't >need the full Cygwin install, though you do get a great set of tools >with it. I use Cygwin to allow a common build environment that works >seamlessly on Solaris, Linux and Windows/Cygwin. Seems pointless redoing >all your hard work for a backwards (closed) system like Windows when >somebody else has done excellent work doing it for you. Thats the open >source way... > >Nick. > >Aron Pilhofer wrote: > >>I knew someone was going to mention Cygwin. I've played with it some, but >>wouldn't under any circumstances consider deploying anything critical that >>requires it. There are times I wish free software folks were a little less >>dogmatic, because I think a stable Win32 version of Postgres would be one >>killer application. >> > > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
Hi out there ! Adding some comments to the backend-part of the debate (the frontend-part circling around PERL and PHP ;-) ): > Postgres and MySQL, features, platforms... Just two things which haven't been mentioned yet: * There IS also a win32-version for Postgresql. It is included in the Cygwin-package (sources.redhat.com/cygwin/). But most statements I've read don't recommend to use the windblows-platform for PG. But I don't have any personal experience with that path... * There is also a nice feature in MySQL I read about which isn't included in PostgreSQL: replication. Again - I just read about it (did some research in possibility of clustering/replication with those two DBs) - no hands-on experience... Finally, both DBs look very promising and I hope to be able to examine them ASAP... Oliver Thieke Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Franki« sagte am 2002-02-22 um 18:43:20 +0800 : > when I said system stuff, I meant more complete DB interfaces and the > like... I still don't understand. What do you mean by "more complete DB interfaces"? In PHP, I can very easily use MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, ODBC Or what do you mean? > personal preference really. Yes, that's true. In reality, the difference between Perl and PHP isn't that big. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 1 day 4 hours 41 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
like I said, its the tool you find more useful for the job.. when I said system stuff, I meant more complete DB interfaces and the like... I have heard many good php programmers state that large projects like php nuke tend to end up with messy code with subsequent versions, I have not done alot of projects with php that are large in scale, so I can't comment. as for mod_perl, its getting more and more common a setup, I was surprised to find that more then half the hosts in my area have it. I write scripts to cover every eventuality, so at the lower end, just standard cgi-bin perl, and session ids and stuff written to file.. at the higher end, mod_perl and MySQL. works great, the majority of people have low turnover shopping carts and want to install the scirpt themselves, so cgi-bin perl is the way to go.. if an enterprise setup is requested and we have full access we setup the mod_perl and MySQL version, works great. Very Quick. I work for a Online Payment Gateway and that side of things is written in JAVA running in JRUN, lots of servlets and a MySQL DB. so its a matter of what tool you are most productive in.. personal preference really. Now if you were promoting ASP, we'd have more to say :-) rgds Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alexander Skwar Sent: Friday, 22 February 2002 5:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux »Franki« sagte am 2002-02-22 um 16:36:59 +0800 : > and I'd have to say that perl and php don't really differ that much in > server load or speed. Well, that's only true if you compare cgi-bin Perl (which most of the hosters only offer) to cgi-bin PHP (which very few hosters offer). If you compare the two most prevalent options (cgi-bin Perl vs. mod_php), cgi-bin Perl greatly looses. The reason is quite simple, because with cgi-bin Perl, the Perl interpreter has to be loaded every time. Not so with mod_php. Now, if you're so lucky to have mod_perl, then you're right. In this case the server load of Perl and PHP is comparable. > 4 Easier to organise huge projects then PHP.. take a look at the code for Why is that? > 6 Age, perl has been around for ages, is very stable and has access to more > system stuff then php, see CPAN above :-). More system stuff? What do you mean by this? > truth of the matter is that its faster on perl.. (I mean development not Same here. > running speed in this case.) particularly since most of my stuff runs on a > wide variety of ISP servers, Solaris, old and new distro's of linux, and all > variations of NT/2000 servers. PHP runs on all of these platforms. > > If the situation changes in the future I'll reassess.. I want to achieve > stuff with the least amount of effort on my part necessary. Exactly, that's why *I* take PHP. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 1 day 2 hours 16 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Franki« sagte am 2002-02-22 um 16:36:59 +0800 : > and I'd have to say that perl and php don't really differ that much in > server load or speed. Well, that's only true if you compare cgi-bin Perl (which most of the hosters only offer) to cgi-bin PHP (which very few hosters offer). If you compare the two most prevalent options (cgi-bin Perl vs. mod_php), cgi-bin Perl greatly looses. The reason is quite simple, because with cgi-bin Perl, the Perl interpreter has to be loaded every time. Not so with mod_php. Now, if you're so lucky to have mod_perl, then you're right. In this case the server load of Perl and PHP is comparable. > 4 Easier to organise huge projects then PHP.. take a look at the code for Why is that? > 6 Age, perl has been around for ages, is very stable and has access to more > system stuff then php, see CPAN above :-). More system stuff? What do you mean by this? > truth of the matter is that its faster on perl.. (I mean development not Same here. > running speed in this case.) particularly since most of my stuff runs on a > wide variety of ISP servers, Solaris, old and new distro's of linux, and all > variations of NT/2000 servers. PHP runs on all of these platforms. > > If the situation changes in the future I'll reassess.. I want to achieve > stuff with the least amount of effort on my part necessary. Exactly, that's why *I* take PHP. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 1 day 2 hours 16 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
I also don't wish to start a flame war, but I write CGI applications predominantly with perl.. and I'd have to say that perl and php don't really differ that much in server load or speed. and I have seen some benchmarks with php, ASP, perl, mod_perl, and JAVA... and in most cases, mod_perl won out on speed, php and perl were not that different, depending on what was being done. ASP I can't remember cos I wasn't particularly interested.. JAVA was in some cases up close to mod_perl as was c++ which makes sense since both are compiled languages. c++ was alittle ahead of JAVA because it didn't run in a java enviroment and as such needed to be compiled for the platform it was on for testing. most of the problems with perl is that it lets you get away with alot, and efficient coding.. (particularly with strictures) can make a huge difference.. alot of people just don't pre-declair variables, which means by default that they become global and take up memory much longer then they are actually needed for.. other issues are caused by unnecessary use of regex, which slows things down a fair bit, if you don't need it to achieve something, find an alternative... efficient coding on perl can be very fast.. particularly with mod_perl. Other benefits of perl. 1. CPAN, (already discussed.) 2. Installed on all unix servers and the vast majority of NT/2000 servers. (php can be as well, but doesn't have the same numbers.) 3. Mod_perl already discussed, enterprise speed applications that compete with languages like C++ and JAVA for speed. 4 Easier to organise huge projects then PHP.. take a look at the code for the older versions of PHPnuke for an example. (niether is as good as JAVA for this though.) 5 Perscript. 6 Age, perl has been around for ages, is very stable and has access to more system stuff then php, see CPAN above :-). Its a matter of using the tool that fits best for the job.. I have no real preference. but I have written alot of online ecommerce stuff and the simple truth of the matter is that its faster on perl.. (I mean development not running speed in this case.) particularly since most of my stuff runs on a wide variety of ISP servers, Solaris, old and new distro's of linux, and all variations of NT/2000 servers. If the situation changes in the future I'll reassess.. I want to achieve stuff with the least amount of effort on my part necessary. rgds Frank -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alexander Skwar Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2002 8:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux »Rob« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 09:45:56 + : > Why do you despise Perl then ? I simply do not like it. For web applications, I find PHP *way* easier (and with most setups: faster) to use. Most of the time, there isn't mod_perl available, so perl scripts cause a *HUGE* load on the server. > Course I might be missing something re PHP, love to learn more if I am. Well, in PHP you need to have the main modules compiled into PHP (or at least as a module). And then there's PEAR, which will be a CPAN alike. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 4 hours 42 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
Could very well be, but at the time we were evaluating, they were in beta and that wasn't an option. Since I haven't had to do any projects with MySQL, lately, I haven't kept up. As such, I should have said that at the time we evaluated it, it didn't meet our needs. Thanks for the update. Joe On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:03:39 +0100 Alexander Skwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > »Joseph Braddock« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 19:16:20 -0600 : > > I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very feature rich and stable >database. We are looking to moving some of our Oracle databases to it. MySQL seems >to get much more press, but it simply lacks many features required for serious >database use (stored procedures, transactions, sub-selects, etc). This is not >intended to start a Postgres vs MySQL war (as both have zealots). MySQL is very good >at the things it does. But because of it's limitations, it doesn't fit our specific >needs. > > > > Well, MySQL *has* transactions and stored procedures (not as good as > Oracles, though). And I think sub-selects are also available in 4.x, > no? > > > Alexander Skwar > -- > How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) > Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen >Uptime: 4 hours 47 minutes > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
That's basically right. There's still a feeling out there that MySQL is the faster database for selects and such, though I have seen benchmarks all over the board on that. And it is quite clear that with version 7.1 (I believe) Postgres has at least closed that speed gap considerably. In terms of transactions *please someone who cares about such things correct me if I am wrong* MySQL should catch up with Postgres very, very soon. In terms of features, again, there really isn't any possible debate here: Postgres has the best feature set of the two, hands down - views and triggers are the big ones on my wish list for MySQL. I think the only thing MySQL does (that I care about) that Postgres doesn't is full-text indexing, though I may be wrong about that. The only thing preventing me from switching to PG is the lack of a Windows version (I know, I know...), which, for reasons I won't get into here, simply eliminates PG as an option for me - at least for the applications I am working on. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob >Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:30 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > > >> »Joseph Braddock« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 19:16:20 -0600 : >> > I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very feature rich >> > and stable database. We are looking to moving some of our Oracle >> >> Well, MySQL *has* transactions and stored procedures (not as good as >> Oracles, though). And I think sub-selects are also available in 4.x, >> no? >> > >I read an intresting (but admitidly possibly wrong) document some time >ago comparing MySQL and Postgres. >MySQL was seen to be an SQL frond end/interface to a file based >system giving >very very quick select access, but lacking high end features. >Wheras Postgres was seen to be a slower but more feature rich system. >I have since seen recent stats (I know - you can make em say what ya want) >comparing the latest greatest postgres that shows it competing on >speed with >MySQL on selects. >But back to this article I read and transactions. >The main difference had something to with Atomic transactions I think. >It was kinda saying that MySQL's transactions were a surface level >function only causing horrible things to happen within the DB and risking >all sorts of corruption should something go wrong with the DB during the >transaction whereas Postgres's transactions were atomic (lots of detail >about what that meant but I forget) giving it extra marks for reliability. > >Rob > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 10:41:36 -0500 : > I'd call myperl more of a third-party workaround than true stored procedure Yes, that's right. > feature I really, truely need. There is no support for subqueries, that I > know. Yes, that's also right. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 8 hours 37 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
I'd call myperl more of a third-party workaround than true stored procedure support, but it looks interesting. Thanks for the tip. That's the one feature I really, truely need. There is no support for subqueries, that I know. >-Original Message- >From: Alexander Skwar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 10:22 AM >To: Aron Pilhofer >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 09:45:54 -0500 : >> I don't think that's right, Alexander. Transactions, yes, but I >have heard a > >What's not right? Depending on the table there are transactions - but I >also haven't used 'em. And stored procedures are available in the form >of myperl - which I also haven't used. > >Alexander Skwar >-- >How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) >Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen > Uptime: 8 hours 5 minutes > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 09:45:54 -0500 : > I don't think that's right, Alexander. Transactions, yes, but I have heard a What's not right? Depending on the table there are transactions - but I also haven't used 'em. And stored procedures are available in the form of myperl - which I also haven't used. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 8 hours 5 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 09:44:17 -0500 : > I won't speak for Alexander, but for my part, I find perl syntax to be > slightly less confusing than Sanskrit. But, in the interests of full ACK > right now. I tried to learn perl, but I just couldn't. PHP I just... I don't > know... got. Like right away. It made sense to me, and continues to. ACK > I know the PHP community is working on something like CPAN (it's called > PEAR), but perl has been around so much longer that PHP has a lot of > catching up to do in that regard. I don't know... I'm getting better and ACK. However, quite some stuff which is in CPAN is already builtin to PHP (eg. session handling, variable parsing, md5, ...). But I totally agree that CPAN is maybe the most useful part of Perl. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 8 hours 2 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
I don't think that's right, Alexander. Transactions, yes, but I have heard a lot of complaining about how they implimented it . (It's not a feature I care about, so I really have not paid a lot of attention...) None of the other stuff is in the current stable version. 3.23.4x. They aren't in the beta 4.x yet either, and aren't scheduled to be implimented until 4.1 (read: anytime soon, if ever). There's some nice new stuff in the 4.x beta - but it is still that, beta. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Alexander Skwar >Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 7:04 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >»Joseph Braddock« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 19:16:20 -0600 : >> I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very >feature rich and stable database. We are looking to moving some >of our Oracle databases to it. MySQL seems to get much more >press, but it simply lacks many features required for serious >database use (stored procedures, transactions, sub-selects, etc). >This is not intended to start a Postgres vs MySQL war (as both >have zealots). MySQL is very good at the things it does. But >because of it's limitations, it doesn't fit our specific needs. >> > >Well, MySQL *has* transactions and stored procedures (not as good as >Oracles, though). And I think sub-selects are also available in 4.x, >no? > > >Alexander Skwar >-- >How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) >Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen > Uptime: 4 hours 47 minutes > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
I won't speak for Alexander, but for my part, I find perl syntax to be slightly less confusing than Sanskrit. But, in the interests of full disclosure, I am a total weekend hacker, developing my first big application right now. I tried to learn perl, but I just couldn't. PHP I just... I don't know... got. Like right away. It made sense to me, and continues to. However, the folks I know who really do this stuff for a living all swear by perl. I know the PHP community is working on something like CPAN (it's called PEAR), but perl has been around so much longer that PHP has a lot of catching up to do in that regard. I don't know... I'm getting better and better at this stuff, so once I am done with this project, maybe I'll make another stab at perl. My 2 cents. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob >Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 4:46 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >On Wednesday 20 February 2002 20:57, Alexander Skwar wrote: > >> And while I also very much love PHP (and despise Perl for web >> development), it's also very easy to switch the DB backend in Perl, >> thanks to the nice DBI package. > >Why do you despise Perl then ? >No flame wars please. >Just intrested. >I have used Perl, PHP, VB, & Java for web programming and currently favour >perl (in its embedded mod_perl form) but have probably spent the most time >with Java. I find Perl quick and easy to get simply things >running. Ditto PHP. >But when I want to start doing more complicated things like say building >up class libraries or processing XML messages via SOAP then Perl >still lets >me via modules in CPAN but thats not the same for PHP. >Course I might be missing something re PHP, love to learn more if I am. > >Rob > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
> »Joseph Braddock« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 19:16:20 -0600 : > > I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very feature rich > > and stable database. We are looking to moving some of our Oracle > > Well, MySQL *has* transactions and stored procedures (not as good as > Oracles, though). And I think sub-selects are also available in 4.x, > no? > I read an intresting (but admitidly possibly wrong) document some time ago comparing MySQL and Postgres. MySQL was seen to be an SQL frond end/interface to a file based system giving very very quick select access, but lacking high end features. Wheras Postgres was seen to be a slower but more feature rich system. I have since seen recent stats (I know - you can make em say what ya want) comparing the latest greatest postgres that shows it competing on speed with MySQL on selects. But back to this article I read and transactions. The main difference had something to with Atomic transactions I think. It was kinda saying that MySQL's transactions were a surface level function only causing horrible things to happen within the DB and risking all sorts of corruption should something go wrong with the DB during the transaction whereas Postgres's transactions were atomic (lots of detail about what that meant but I forget) giving it extra marks for reliability. Rob Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Joseph Braddock« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 19:16:20 -0600 : > I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very feature rich and stable >database. We are looking to moving some of our Oracle databases to it. MySQL seems >to get much more press, but it simply lacks many features required for serious >database use (stored procedures, transactions, sub-selects, etc). This is not >intended to start a Postgres vs MySQL war (as both have zealots). MySQL is very good >at the things it does. But because of it's limitations, it doesn't fit our specific >needs. > Well, MySQL *has* transactions and stored procedures (not as good as Oracles, though). And I think sub-selects are also available in 4.x, no? Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 4 hours 47 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Rob« sagte am 2002-02-21 um 09:45:56 + : > Why do you despise Perl then ? I simply do not like it. For web applications, I find PHP *way* easier (and with most setups: faster) to use. Most of the time, there isn't mod_perl available, so perl scripts cause a *HUGE* load on the server. > Course I might be missing something re PHP, love to learn more if I am. Well, in PHP you need to have the main modules compiled into PHP (or at least as a module). And then there's PEAR, which will be a CPAN alike. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 4 hours 42 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Thursday 21 February 2002 00:27, you wrote: > I'm having a helluva time trying to get xmbase-grok to work correctly. > I first tried the 1.5 source install. Try version 1.4.3 Runs fine over here on lesstif -- Michel Clasquin, D Litt et Phil (Unisa) [EMAIL PROTECTED]/unisa.ac.za http://www.geocities.com/clasqm This message was posted from a Microsoft-free PC ... Linux users and the women who chase them - next Oprah! Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wednesday 20 February 2002 20:57, Alexander Skwar wrote: > And while I also very much love PHP (and despise Perl for web > development), it's also very easy to switch the DB backend in Perl, > thanks to the nice DBI package. Why do you despise Perl then ? No flame wars please. Just intrested. I have used Perl, PHP, VB, & Java for web programming and currently favour perl (in its embedded mod_perl form) but have probably spent the most time with Java. I find Perl quick and easy to get simply things running. Ditto PHP. But when I want to start doing more complicated things like say building up class libraries or processing XML messages via SOAP then Perl still lets me via modules in CPAN but thats not the same for PHP. Course I might be missing something re PHP, love to learn more if I am. Rob Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Aron Pilhofer wrote: > >The developer offered some help and suggested a possible entry in my > >.Xdefaults. This didn't fix the error though. He believes it to be a > >config error on my part. > > Ah yes, the old "when in doubt, blame the user" gambit. ;) > Works for me :) > But seriously, is there any reason you wouldn't want to use MySQL/Postgres? > Both are fairly light and compact, and neither is a major tax on available > resources. I could understand it if we were talking about a $2,000 pricetag > on an app like MS-SQL server, but the price here is right... and they both > come packaged with most distros, including 'drake. Just curious. > I *am* using Postgres for my main database. The application was pointed out to me and it seemed it would be interesting to compare the speeds of each and see at what point the SQL database started to pull ahead of the flat file one. I also wanted to pull it apart to understand how to use the motif libraries. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
I'd have to concur with Rob. Postgres seems to be a very feature rich and stable database. We are looking to moving some of our Oracle databases to it. MySQL seems to get much more press, but it simply lacks many features required for serious database use (stored procedures, transactions, sub-selects, etc). This is not intended to start a Postgres vs MySQL war (as both have zealots). MySQL is very good at the things it does. But because of it's limitations, it doesn't fit our specific needs. Joe On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:11:21 + Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:43, Harold wrote: > > >And of > > course if you're a self proclaimed masacist you could always take a look > > at Postgres. > > Postgres (in my experience) has always been very stable and easy > to learn and use. Probably the most so of all RDBMs I have used. > I dont know what experience (or closed minded ?? viewpoint) Harold > has to justify masocism in regard to postgres (maybee he used a very > old version a long time ago - ?). > Anyway ignore such pointless insults. Take a look yourself and make up > your own mind. > > Rob > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
>The developer offered some help and suggested a possible entry in my >.Xdefaults. This didn't fix the error though. He believes it to be a >config error on my part. Ah yes, the old "when in doubt, blame the user" gambit. ;) But seriously, is there any reason you wouldn't want to use MySQL/Postgres? Both are fairly light and compact, and neither is a major tax on available resources. I could understand it if we were talking about a $2,000 pricetag on an app like MS-SQL server, but the price here is right... and they both come packaged with most distros, including 'drake. Just curious. _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Michel Clasquin wrote: > On Wednesday 20 February 2002 19:51, you wrote: > > > If anyone > > > needs only a simple flat-file database for personal use, try > > > xmbase-grok: > > > > Interesting program. How is its performance with large data files? > > Haven't tried it with anything major, but I suspect performance would > start to suffer after 10 000 records or so. It was never made with that in > mind. > I'm having a helluva time trying to get xmbase-grok to work correctly. I first tried the 1.5 source install. Building required motif; I had lesstif installed but couldn't locate the devel packages. So I grabbed and rebuilt the lesstif source rpms. Built grok but had to specify the Lesstif includes and Xext and Xp libraries in the Makefile. On running grok I received a bunch of missing font errors, even though they were available through xfontsel. The developer offered some help and suggested a possible entry in my .Xdefaults. This didn't fix the error though. He believes it to be a config error on my part. This is possible, but other applications run without error. I'm looking at this next. I downloaded the i386 rpm but this one required OpenMotif and not lesstif. I grabbed, built and installed the latest OpenMotif. Ran grok... Drats, same missing font errors... It looks like it could be a useful program but I'm not getting anywhere with it yet... Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
Yeah, true enough for applications...of course. The question (I thought) was about the many collections of code snippits out there, which people have written with one db or another in mind. Very, very easy to adapt those to whatever database manager/server you are using - maybe I misunderstood. >-Original Message- >From: Alexander Skwar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:57 PM >To: Aron Pilhofer >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 12:19:56 -0500 : >> Just FYI, (almost) any script written in PHP for mysql can be >adapted quite >> easily for any RDBM, including Postgres. That's one of the really nice >> things about PHP, IMHO. > >Well, in *theory*, you're right. But this holds only so long true, as >you write "pure" SQL and don't use any special RDBMS dependent >optimizations. So, while you can very easily switch the backend, you >really have to take a lot of precautions to ensure that the application >still works after the switch. > >And while I also very much love PHP (and despise Perl for web >development), it's also very easy to switch the DB backend in Perl, >thanks to the nice DBI package. > >Alexander Skwar >-- >How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) >Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen > Uptime: 7 days 13 hours 24 minutes > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Aron Pilhofer« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 12:19:56 -0500 : > Just FYI, (almost) any script written in PHP for mysql can be adapted quite > easily for any RDBM, including Postgres. That's one of the really nice > things about PHP, IMHO. Well, in *theory*, you're right. But this holds only so long true, as you write "pure" SQL and don't use any special RDBMS dependent optimizations. So, while you can very easily switch the backend, you really have to take a lot of precautions to ensure that the application still works after the switch. And while I also very much love PHP (and despise Perl for web development), it's also very easy to switch the DB backend in Perl, thanks to the nice DBI package. Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 7 days 13 hours 24 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wednesday 20 February 2002 02:08 am, you wrote: > Try postgres and mySQL for starters. > > -Original Message- > From: Harold Hartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:16:50 -0800 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [expert] databases for linux > > > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > > and what the names of them may be.. > > > > Harold FWIW, there is a very neat program availabe for a Linux GUI database. It is called Knoda and (at this time) supports MySql (inluded with Mandrak 8.1) in a M$ Access look alike format. Forms and reports are also supported and unlike PGAccess you don't need to know coding to get the textbox to take info (or labels etc.). If you have used M$ Access you know that you can build a table, populate it and retrieve the info through a form, Knoda does this as well. It's worh a look. Knoda can be found at http://knoda.sourceforge.net -- Ken Thompson, North West Antique Autos Payette, Idaho Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nwaa.com Sales and brokering of antique autos and parts. Linux- Coming Soon To A Desktop Near You Registered Linux User #183936 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wednesday 20 February 2002 19:51, you wrote: > > If anyone > > needs only a simple flat-file database for personal use, try > > xmbase-grok: > > Interesting program. How is its performance with large data files? Haven't tried it with anything major, but I suspect performance would start to suffer after 10 000 records or so. It was never made with that in mind. -- Michel Clasquin, D Litt et Phil (Unisa) [EMAIL PROTECTED]/unisa.ac.za http://www.geocities.com/clasqm This message was posted from a Microsoft-free PC ... Linux users and the women who chase them - next Oprah! Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Michel Clasquin wrote: > On Wednesday 20 February 2002 16:35, you wrote: > > > I'm using Postgres now as the backend to my library (about 2,000 books, > > 300 CDs). > > Wow, that's like swatting a mosquito with a cruise missile. If anyone > needs only a simple flat-file database for personal use, try xmbase-grok: The project was intended as more of a learning experience than for practicality :). Another reason was to be able to pull information directly into the form from the Library of Congress, something that I hadn't seen implented in other catalog software. At the least, it should scale well over the next few years as I collect more books. > > http://www.bitrot.de/grok.html > > Simple to set up (rpms available at rpmfind.net), saves its data files as > plain text, and it goes like hell! > > Interesting program. How is its performance with large data files? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Aron Pilhofer wrote: > Just FYI, (almost) any script written in PHP for mysql can be adapted quite > easily for any RDBM, including Postgres. That's one of the really nice > things about PHP, IMHO. At the time I was writing the library scripts I didn't know much about PHP. I've since spent some time to learn it and found out that 95% of the custom code for the *online* portion could have been done in PHP. On a side note, I've met David Axmark, one of the original designers and owners, and was very impressed by him. I'll try to locate the RealVideo streams of his presentation at our local Linux group if anyone's interested. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wednesday 20 February 2002 16:35, you wrote: > I'm using Postgres now as the backend to my library (about 2,000 books, > 300 CDs). Wow, that's like swatting a mosquito with a cruise missile. If anyone needs only a simple flat-file database for personal use, try xmbase-grok: http://www.bitrot.de/grok.html Simple to set up (rpms available at rpmfind.net), saves its data files as plain text, and it goes like hell! -- Michel Clasquin, D Litt et Phil (Unisa) [EMAIL PROTECTED]/unisa.ac.za http://www.geocities.com/clasqm This message was posted from a Microsoft-free PC ... Linux users and the women who chase them - next Oprah! Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
Just FYI, (almost) any script written in PHP for mysql can be adapted quite easily for any RDBM, including Postgres. That's one of the really nice things about PHP, IMHO. Again, though, the difference between MySQL and Postgres really have more to do with feature set and speed than ease of setup and use. I don't want to start a religious debate here, but I think everyone who really knows a db thinks it's the easiest to setup and use. They both have their quirks. Choose first based on which features you need, that's my advice. If you need views and subqueries, then it's a pretty simple decision. If you need to do lightning-fast selects on millions and millions of records, again it's a pretty easy call. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:36 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Rob wrote: >> Postgres (in my experience) has always been very stable and easy >> to learn and use. Probably the most so of all RDBMs I have used. >> I dont know what experience (or closed minded ?? viewpoint) Harold >> has to justify masocism in regard to postgres (maybee he used a very >> old version a long time ago - ?). > >Postgres has been simple for me to use and configure. I had only minor >administration experience with databases previously (some Oracle), but >found Postgres easy to setup and use. This is not to say that MySQL was >difficult, only that I had initial problems with it and authentication >(it seems I had to add user IDs directly to the tables). > >I'm using Postgres now as the backend to my library (about 2,000 books, >300 CDs). There was not as many pre-made scripts in PHP as there was for >MySQL, but I did find lots of examples in C and Perl. > > > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
The open source DB's are great but I'd also suggest you try some commercal RDBMS giants too: Oracle www.oracle.com or direct download page at http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/oracle9i/software_index.htm Oracle 9i and 8i are both available for Linux as a download. You need to sign up for a free technet account to access the software but that's all... they don't spam you relentlessly either afterwards ! Sybase www.sybase.com or direct download page at http://www.sybase.com/detail_list/1,6902,2282,00.html DB2 IBM's database http://www14.software.ibm.com/webapp/download/category.jsp?s=s&cat=data&source=sd This has a database clustering version All have free for personal use Linux versions and are in more use globally in companies etc that the others... All have extensive online docs and newsgroups and forums abound. Regards, Dominic -Original Message- From: Simon Naish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 9:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux Try postgres and mySQL for starters. -Original Message- From: Harold Hartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:16:50 -0800 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [expert] databases for linux > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > and what the names of them may be.. > > Harold > > > > -- ___ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup 1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.! http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Rob wrote: > Postgres (in my experience) has always been very stable and easy > to learn and use. Probably the most so of all RDBMs I have used. > I dont know what experience (or closed minded ?? viewpoint) Harold > has to justify masocism in regard to postgres (maybee he used a very > old version a long time ago - ?). Postgres has been simple for me to use and configure. I had only minor administration experience with databases previously (some Oracle), but found Postgres easy to setup and use. This is not to say that MySQL was difficult, only that I had initial problems with it and authentication (it seems I had to add user IDs directly to the tables). I'm using Postgres now as the backend to my library (about 2,000 books, 300 CDs). There was not as many pre-made scripts in PHP as there was for MySQL, but I did find lots of examples in C and Perl. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
True. My mistake. Sorry Harold. On Wednesday 20 February 2002 12:00, you wrote: > »Rob« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 11:11:21 + : > > On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:43, Harold wrote: > > ^^ > > No, Harold did not say this. Please learn to quote correctly! > > Alexander Skwar Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Rob« sagte am 2002-02-20 um 11:11:21 + : > On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:43, Harold wrote: ^^ No, Harold did not say this. Please learn to quote correctly! Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 7 days 4 hours 31 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:43, Harold wrote: >And of > course if you're a self proclaimed masacist you could always take a look > at Postgres. Postgres (in my experience) has always been very stable and easy to learn and use. Probably the most so of all RDBMs I have used. I dont know what experience (or closed minded ?? viewpoint) Harold has to justify masocism in regard to postgres (maybee he used a very old version a long time ago - ?). Anyway ignore such pointless insults. Take a look yourself and make up your own mind. Rob Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
On Tue, 2002-02-19 at 11:16, Harold Hartley wrote: > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > and what the names of them may be.. > > Harold Harold, There are quite a few, most of which I can't recall off the top of my head, but the two most used are MySQL, and Oracle in that order. And of course if you're a self proclaimed masacist you could always take a look at Postgres. MySQL and Postgres come standard with every Mandrake installation. Check your install CD's. The RPM's are there. -- daRcmaTTeR Registered Linux User 182496 Mandrake 8.2beta1 - 8:05am up 14:50, 0 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
Try postgres and mySQL for starters. -Original Message- From: Harold Hartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:16:50 -0800 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [expert] databases for linux > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > and what the names of them may be.. > > Harold > > > > -- ___ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup 1 cent a minute calls anywhere in the U.S.! http://www.getpennytalk.com/cgi-bin/adforward.cgi?p_key=RG9853KJ&url=http://www.getpennytalk.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
Pervasive has a Linux version also. I am sure this list will just keep growing as everyone chimes in :) On Tue, 2002-02-19 at 08:51, Mike Leone wrote: > From: "Alexander Skwar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > »Harold Hartley« sagte am 2002-02-19 um 08:16:50 -0800 : > >> I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > > >hmm, i can think of 4 right now. > > >> and what the names of them may be.. > > >mysql, postgresql, oracle, cache > > Also Informix, DB2, and probably others have Linux versions. > > > > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: Re: [expert] databases for linux
Also Interbase, mSQL, and SapDB -Original Message- From: Rob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 13:57:44 + Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux also sybase, DB3, and Ingres. On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:41, you wrote: > »Harold Hartley« sagte am 2002-02-19 um 08:16:50 -0800 : > > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > > hmm, i can think of 4 right now. > > > and what the names of them may be.. > > mysql, postgresql, oracle, cache > > Alexander Skwar Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
also sybase, DB3, and Ingres. On Tuesday 19 February 2002 13:41, you wrote: > »Harold Hartley« sagte am 2002-02-19 um 08:16:50 -0800 : > > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > > hmm, i can think of 4 right now. > > > and what the names of them may be.. > > mysql, postgresql, oracle, cache > > Alexander Skwar Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
To expand some... MySQL is a wicked fast db with some limitations. I am using it right now for a project and I'm really wishing it supported views, for example. To the good, it is really, really fast, light and stable. Postgre has many more features and is supposed to be a lot faster than it used to be with the most recent version. I have seen benchmarks that support this, and some that refute it. But in any case, it does have a lot better feature set than MySQL - particularly for handling dates. It also supports views and subqueries. PG has a really slick GUI too: PG access. You really can't go wrong with either one, but there are advantages/disadvantages to each depending on the project you are planning. >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of wim >Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 9:06 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [expert] databases for linux > > >PostgreSQL and MySQL are databases for Linux. > >-- >Kind regards, > >Wim De Hul >Belgacom Belbone > > Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Mobile : +32 479 952004 > Ripe : WDH25-RIPE > Registered Linux User: #260015 > > > >Harold Hartley wrote: > >> I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux >> and what the names of them may be.. >> >> Harold >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? >> Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com >> > > > > _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
PostgreSQL and MySQL are databases for Linux. -- Kind regards, Wim De Hul Belgacom Belbone Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile : +32 479 952004 Ripe : WDH25-RIPE Registered Linux User: #260015 Harold Hartley wrote: > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux > and what the names of them may be.. > > Harold > > > > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
RE: [expert] databases for linux
MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle (i believe), DB2, dbMetrix, Informix-SE, Interbase, jBASE, mSQL, Znd check out: http://www.linux.org/apps/all/Office/Database.html Chad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Harold Hartley Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 11:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [expert] databases for linux I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux and what the names of them may be.. Harold Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
From: "Alexander Skwar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> »Harold Hartley« sagte am 2002-02-19 um 08:16:50 -0800 : >> I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux >hmm, i can think of 4 right now. >> and what the names of them may be.. >mysql, postgresql, oracle, cache Also Informix, DB2, and probably others have Linux versions. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [expert] databases for linux
»Harold Hartley« sagte am 2002-02-19 um 08:16:50 -0800 : > I was wondering how many database software is there available for linux hmm, i can think of 4 right now. > and what the names of them may be.. mysql, postgresql, oracle, cache Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.iso-top.de | Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] iso-top.de - Die günstige Art an Linux Distributionen zu kommen Uptime: 6 days 6 hours 12 minutes Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
