MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
Paul Lussier wrote: It is lacking features[1][2], and I've certainly seen plenty (if not most) uses of MySQL completely abuse it to the point where the developer completely missed the R point RDB[3]. Most programmers are amateurs. Even the really, really good ones. Business application programmers follow the same normal curve as most everything else: few really, really good ones, few really, really bad ones, but the bad ones leave such memorable disasters behind them! More fuel for the fire... Josh Berkus blogs, What is does show is that PostgreSQL and MySQL are very, very close in performance today and the outdated belief that MySQL is somehow multiple times faster than PostgreSQL is dramatically misplaced. Users should be picking a database based on which specific performance features, and other features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant assessment that Database X is way faster. That's pretty much been true for years, but the very close benchmark results shows that pretty clearly. Source: http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/benchmark-brouhaha-17939 Competition is Good. -- Ted Amateur == From the Heart Roche Ted Roche Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On 7/31/07, Ted Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Josh Berkus blogs, ... should be picking a database based on which specific ... features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant assessment that Database X is way faster. Are you saying that decisions should be made based on facts and measured results, and not just on random hearsay, anecdote, and popular rumor? Well, there goes two-thirds of the Internet. And most CMP and IDG publications. ;-) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 10:39 -0400, Ted Roche wrote: Paul Lussier wrote: It is lacking features[1][2], and I've certainly seen plenty (if not most) uses of MySQL completely abuse it to the point where the developer completely missed the R point RDB[3]. Most programmers are amateurs. Even the really, really good ones. Business application programmers follow the same normal curve as most everything else: few really, really good ones, few really, really bad ones, but the bad ones leave such memorable disasters behind them! More fuel for the fire... Josh Berkus blogs, What is does show is that PostgreSQL and MySQL are very, very close in performance today and the outdated belief that MySQL is somehow multiple times faster than PostgreSQL is dramatically misplaced. Users should be picking a database based on which specific performance features, and other features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant assessment that Database X is way faster. That's pretty much been true for years, but the very close benchmark results shows that pretty clearly. Source: http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/benchmark-brouhaha-17939 Competition is Good. In my experience, key reasons to choose MySQL are: replication - it is easy to feed changes to remote servers without the uptime requirements of two-phase commits easy administration As a DBMS, it requires more planning in developing an application simply because of its differences from the competition and the lack of commit/rollback in its myisam tables. -- Lloyd Kvam Venix Corp ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
I've heard it said that MySQL is the ideal database for programmers who don't understand databases. No annoyances like stored procedures and server constraints to get in the way of your application code scribbling all over the tables. ;-) Of course, I gather MySQL has improved a fair bit in terms of features, especially with the addition of the InnoDB engine, so it's not a fair assessment of MySQL any longer. But I suspect it is still a fair assessment of most of the Learn PHP in 27 seconds crowd :) -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
No annoyances like stored procedures Oh well, they just added stored procedures in 5.0 md ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:39:32 -0400 Ted Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Lussier wrote: It is lacking features[1][2], and I've certainly seen plenty (if not most) uses of MySQL completely abuse it to the point where the developer completely missed the R point RDB[3]. Most programmers are amateurs. Even the really, really good ones. Business application programmers follow the same normal curve as most everything else: few really, really good ones, few really, really bad ones, but the bad ones leave such memorable disasters behind them! More fuel for the fire... Josh Berkus blogs, What is does show is that PostgreSQL and MySQL are very, very close in performance today and the outdated belief that MySQL is somehow multiple times faster than PostgreSQL is dramatically misplaced. Users should be picking a database based on which specific performance features, and other features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant assessment that Database X is way faster. That's pretty much been true for years, but the very close benchmark results shows that pretty clearly. Source: http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/benchmark-brouhaha-17939 Competition is Good. One symptom which indicates that programmers are amateurs is that they prematurely optimize. In this case, a concentration on performance, as though it were the only question. In the professional environment, performance is only one of several, or many, considerations. In aviation, for instance, there has been over the years a succession of new technology in engines, repeated again and again. More HP! Faster cruise speed! Also repeated again and again: sober experience from deployment. Heat load. Reliability. Holes in pistons. (A little thing like that at 8,000 feet can ruin your whole day.) So real engineers laugh at the 10 more horsepower crowd. It's the same in power-plant design, the same in refineries, the same in architecture, the same in bridge building. (Bridges give us some EXCELLENT examples of what happens when an engineer goes a little bit amateur. You've probably seen a video of the Tacoma Narrows bridge coming apart.) IN THIS CASE (databases) it's not professional to concentrate on performance as though all the other considerations have been proven to be equal. They have not. For one example, the difference in licensing, and in proprietariness or potential proprietariness(*) has not been established.) Only an amateur would feel satisfied at 10% faster when the customers' real exposure may appear two years from now when one product or another is withdrawn from the market.(**) I'm not saying any of those other things will happen. It's only that real engineers recognize things which *might* happen and factor them into the work they do for their clients. (Like winds and resonances for a bridge design.) The amateur has the luxury of concentrating on the fun things. Like performance. also_from_the_heart'ly yrs, Bill (*) potential proprietariness - read: whether a large corporation might buy out the principal sponsor of the project, or enter into a patent agreement with the principal sponsor of the project. Whether the principal sponsor is a commercial entity or not can become an issue. (Think of Novell.) (**) withdrawn from the market - read: whether a large corporation might buy out the principal sponsor of the project with the express purpose to leave customers with a migration path to the obvious remaining choice. (Think of Blackboard and WebCT.) ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 11:53:23AM -0400, Jon 'maddog' Hall wrote: No annoyances like stored procedures Oh well, they just added stored procedures in 5.0 And a bunch of other useful features such as triggers, views and more storage engines for specialized database needs (some via 3rd parties). -marc -- Marc Nozell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nozell.com/blog ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On 7/31/07, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Bridges give us some EXCELLENT examples of what happens when an engineer goes a little bit amateur. You've probably seen a video of the Tacoma Narrows bridge coming apart.) In fairness to the engineers behind the Tacoma Narrows bridge, I haven't seen anything which suggested they didn't know what they were doing. Everything I've seen stated that the resonance which built up due to wind was unprecedented in the Civil Engineering world. It had simply never been encountered or even considered before. According to Wikipedia, the designer of the TN bridge, Leon Moisseiff, was also a major contributor to the engineering of the Golden Gate Bridge. So Galloping Gertie is not so much about amateurism, but unforeseen consequences. Of course, most of us are familiar with *those*, too -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On 7/31/07, Jon 'maddog' Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh well, they just added stored procedures in 5.0 On 7/31/07, Marc Nozell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And a bunch of other useful features such as triggers, views and more storage engines for specialized database needs (some via 3rd parties). I'm gonna have to start putting a Please read and consider my entire message before replying notice at the top of all my posts... ;-) On 7/31/07, Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course, I gather MySQL has improved a fair bit in terms of features, especially with the addition of the InnoDB engine, so it's not a fair assessment of MySQL any longer. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm gonna have to start putting a Please read and consider my entire message before replying notice at the top of all my posts... But that would eliminate much of the hilarity ensuing from those who take snippets of your posts completely out of context :) Not to mention the fact that the words Please read at the top of any e-mail pretty much guarantees most people won't :) -- Seeya, Paul ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On Tuesday 31 July 2007 01:14:40 pm Ben Scott wrote: On 7/31/07, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Bridges give us some EXCELLENT examples of what happens when an engineer goes a little bit amateur. You've probably seen a video of the Tacoma Narrows bridge coming apart.) In fairness to the engineers behind the Tacoma Narrows bridge, I haven't seen anything which suggested they didn't know what they were doing. Everything I've seen stated that the resonance which built up due to wind was unprecedented in the Civil Engineering world. It had simply never been encountered or even considered before. According to Wikipedia, the designer of the TN bridge, Leon Moisseiff, was also a major contributor to the engineering of the Golden Gate Bridge. So Galloping Gertie is not so much about amateurism, but unforeseen consequences. Of course, most of us are familiar with *those*, too Ooh, ooh, everyone who's driven across the Tacoma Narrows bridge multiple times raise your hand! /me raises hand... Pretty fun getting stuck in traffic on it, out near the middle, and remembering that video... :) -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On Tue, July 31, 2007 2:54 pm, Jarod Wilson said: Ooh, ooh, everyone who's driven across the Tacoma Narrows bridge multiple times raise your hand! /me raises hand... Wow! You don't *look* that old, grampa! :-) -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux Unix IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On Tuesday 31 July 2007 03:10:03 pm John Abreau wrote: On Tue, July 31, 2007 2:54 pm, Jarod Wilson said: Ooh, ooh, everyone who's driven across the Tacoma Narrows bridge multiple times raise your hand! /me raises hand... Wow! You don't *look* that old, grampa! :-) Why would I need to be old? :) I suppose I should have clarified that I meant the *new* Tacoma Narrows bridge, not the one from the video... -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
At 2:54 PM -0400 7/31/07, Jarod Wilson wrote: On Tuesday 31 July 2007 01:14:40 pm Ben Scott wrote: On 7/31/07, Bill Sconce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Bridges give us some EXCELLENT examples of what happens when an engineer goes a little bit amateur. You've probably seen a video of the Tacoma Narrows bridge coming apart.) In fairness to the engineers behind the Tacoma Narrows bridge, I haven't seen anything which suggested they didn't know what they were doing. Everything I've seen stated that the resonance which built up due to wind was unprecedented in the Civil Engineering world. It had simply never been encountered or even considered before. According to Wikipedia, the designer of the TN bridge, Leon Moisseiff, was also a major contributor to the engineering of the Golden Gate Bridge. So Galloping Gertie is not so much about amateurism, but unforeseen consequences. Of course, most of us are familiar with *those*, too Ooh, ooh, everyone who's driven across the Tacoma Narrows bridge multiple times raise your hand! The twin for the Tacoma Narrows bridge is not that far down the road, in Deer Isle Maine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deer_Isle,_Maine ...bridge does bounce up and won on windy days... I'll say it does. Has an interesting sway to it as well. --Ray -- Raymond Cote Appropriate Solutions, Inc. PO Box 458 ~ Peterborough, NH 03458-0458 Phone: 603.924.6079 ~ Fax: 603.924.8668 rgacote(at)AppropriateSolutions.com www.AppropriateSolutions.com ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On 7/31/07, Ray Cote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 2:54 PM -0400 7/31/07, Jarod Wilson wrote: On Tuesday 31 July 2007 01:14:40 pm Ben Scott wrote: The twin for the Tacoma Narrows bridge is not that far down the road, in Deer Isle Maine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deer_Isle,_Maine Someone explain to me again exactly how these bridges run Linux? :-P -- -- Thomas ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
On Tuesday 31 July 2007 04:33:04 pm Thomas Charron wrote: On 7/31/07, Ray Cote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 2:54 PM -0400 7/31/07, Jarod Wilson wrote: On Tuesday 31 July 2007 01:14:40 pm Ben Scott wrote: The twin for the Tacoma Narrows bridge is not that far down the road, in Deer Isle Maine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deer_Isle,_Maine Someone explain to me again exactly how these bridges run Linux? :-P Perhaps there were computational fluid dynamics models of the bridges that were run on Linux? ;) -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...)
One symptom which indicates that programmers are amateurs is that they prematurely optimize. That's certainly true in compiler design, but ... More HP! Oh - hp. I thought you were talking about printers. :-) So real engineers laugh at the 10 more horsepower crowd. Yes, but, one thing that drives the high performance computing market is just that. Spending what looks like a lot of time on compiler and library work to get 5% more results out of a system is likely much less effort than is required by the chip and system designers to get 5% more out of a design. (Bridges give us some EXCELLENT examples of what happens when an engineer goes a little bit amateur. You've probably seen a video of the Tacoma Narrows bridge coming apart.) In that particular case, it was more along the line of inadequate wind tunnel and simulation time. (The slide rules of the day were slow and inaccurate.) When an entire profession learns a lot from a particular bridge, blaming it on amateurs is a bit unfair. And they learned a lot before the winds got to strong. Besides - a lot of current bridges can be taken down surprisingly easily. Marching bands break sync crossing bridges, the Golden Gate bridge has been closed due to winds and strengthed in response. It was visibly deflected by the pedestrian load during its 50th anniversary celebration when the bridge was closed to vehicles and open to pedestrians. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/11/MNGRIPPB271.DTL http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/pictopia2?o=7f=/templates/types/store/pages/buyphotos/dtl/goldengate.DTL -Ric ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
OpenFoam (was Re: Tacoma Narrows bridge (was: MySQL v. PostgreSQL ...))
Someone explain to me again exactly how these bridges run Linux? :-P Perhaps there were computational fluid dynamics models of the bridges that were run on Linux? ;) And there is a very nice CFD package called OpenFoam that runs on Linux and is GPLed. It has come highly recommended to me by a man who wanted to know why his plastic duck floated around in his backyard pool the way it did, yet he did not want to spend zillions of dollars for a commercial CFD package. So we brought the discussion back to Linux. md -- Jon maddog Hall Executive Director Linux International(R) email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 80 Amherst St. Voice: +1.603.672.4557 Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A. WWW: http://www.li.org Board Member: Uniforum Association Board Member Emeritus: USENIX Association (2000-2006) (R)Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in several countries. (R)Linux International is a registered trademark in the USA used pursuant to a license from Linux Mark Institute, authorized licensor of Linus Torvalds, owner of the Linux trademark on a worldwide basis (R)UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the USA and other countries. ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
Re: MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 13:54 -0400, Paul Lussier wrote: Ben Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm gonna have to start putting a Please read and consider my entire message before replying notice at the top of all my posts... But that would eliminate much of the hilarity ensuing from those who take snippets of your posts completely out of context :) Not to mention the fact that the words Please read at the top of any e-mail pretty much guarantees most people won't :) I, for one, read and considered Ben's entire post before replying. However, since Ben had singled out stored procedures as one of the annoyances that MySQL did not have and in his next paragraph stated that MySQL had improved with features, yet had not mentioned stored procedures, I surmised that he might be uninformed that not only has MySQL implemented stored procedures, but that O'Reilly has published an entire book on the subject: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mysqlspp/ which I happened to see at OSCON last week. md ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
