Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Chris Devers wrote: I've put copies of Pg on pretty old equipment it ran tolerably well -- good enough to put sample databases in, write code against it, etc. I've tried putting the demo version of Oracle on somewhat better hardware (sorry, it's been a while I forget all specs) and, aside from the fact that setting everything up was much more of a pain, the strain on the machine was much more noticeable than when running Pg, subjectively speaking, to the extent that I never bothered using it much. Sounds like pretty much all 'big' software. You need a certain level of power before it's worth using the heavyweight solution. One example that springs to mind of solaris x86. In the early days of linux, if you had more than 4MB and less than 64MB (and most peoples toyboxes) then linux ran like a dream, but there was no point trying to run solaris. These days, where you'd be pushed to find a machine with less than 128MB, either runs fine on a toybox for testing things. But if your app is likely to be running for real on a huge sun box, you'd maybe be better to go with solaris x86, to make scaling it a bit easier. Similarly, the mSQL-MySQL-PG progression. mSQL came along and at last it was possible to run a fairly reasonable SQL database on tiny hardware, and lots of things where built on it. Slowly people started playing with mysql, as it matured along with average hardware specs, and any new projects were built on that, msql was depreciated, and apps moved across. These days, I work with dozens of mysql-based systems. But if I was starting a project from scratch, I'd much rather use pg. Then again, working past that ramp-up may be the whole point... I can certainly see the value of at least having seen the installer to any product you use, or claim to be able to use professionally. Just like reading manuals thoroughly (no, I don't expect anyone to have read all the docs you get with an oracle distribution) you gain an understanding of how things work and interrelate. It also makes you aware of what settings can be fiddled with, to optimise performance, when otherwise your application might be thrashing a lot more than necessary. Most importantly, it means that if some new employers 'expert sysadmin' who installs oracle is actually a rather vision-impaired monarch, you'll not be intimidated by the dozens of CDs, kilos of manuals, hours of install screens, and system boot-strapping necessary to at least get yourself a reasonable base install. the hatter
RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
Title: RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration And I am one of those scapegoats, ;-) On a side-note, there are enormous numbers of people whose entire career consists of Oracle DBA or Oracle Consultant, many of whom are entirely ignorant of concepts I would consider fundamental to the role. I wonder if there's anyone who is an official Postgress DBA who is not really doing a load of sysadmin/developer work as well? Perhaps PG shops are enlightened enough not to require a scapegoat for database problems? ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **
RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
Title: RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration Correction, -Original Message- From: Steve Keay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 November 2002 00:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:43:32PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Walt Mankowski wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:39:45AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? Sorry, there was a comma @,', or 'or' mising in that sentence! Be careful with your terminology. Oracle is Oracle; SQL Server is Microsoft's RDBMS. Having said that, the main commercial benefit is that there are a hell of a lot more Oracle shops in the world than PostgreSQL shops. ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 02:06:44AM +, Paul Makepeace wrote: On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 06:49:52PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: I've tried putting the demo version of Oracle on somewhat better hardware (sorry, it's been a while I forget all specs) and, aside from the fact You really do have to throw one honkin' chunk o' RAM at it. Not to mention disk space for the install; 9i is over a gig download. Further, Tell me about it: Memory: 12G real, 5823M free, 1999M swap free Only 5.8GB free because I restarted Solaris this morning to change max shmem to 4GB ... it'll be gone by tonight and the app (Oracle Financials) still runs like a dog. Of course, the conspiracy theorists would claim this is to keep DBA consultants in business... :-) -- Chris Benson
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 14:25, Chris Benson wrote: Tell me about it: Memory: 12G real, 5823M free, 1999M swap free Only 5.8GB free because I restarted Solaris this morning to change max shmem to 4GB ... it'll be gone by tonight and the app (Oracle Financials) still runs like a dog. That is a insult to several lurchers that I know and love. The simile I think you are groping for is: like a snail on mogodon. Dirk -- Dirk Koopman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 02:46:36PM +, Dirk Koopman wrote: That is a insult to several lurchers that I know and love. The simile I think you are groping for is: like a snail on mogodon. I stand corrected ... until I can think of a metaphor that conjures the massive bulk that is Oracle Financials :-) -- Chris Benson
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:39:45AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? Be careful with your terminology. Oracle is Oracle; SQL Server is Microsoft's RDBMS. Having said that, the main commercial benefit is that there are a hell of a lot more Oracle shops in the world than PostgreSQL shops. Walt msg09247/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Walt Mankowski wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:39:45AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? Be careful with your terminology. Oracle is Oracle; SQL Server is Microsoft's RDBMS. Having said that, the main commercial benefit is that there are a hell of a lot more Oracle shops in the world than PostgreSQL shops. But is it safe to say that in some ways -- and for most things that one would be likely to do while learning at home, perhaps *all* ways -- Oracle and PostgreSQL can be treated as if they are interchangeable? Put another way, Oracle skills may be more marketable, but paying for the right licenses hardware to learn Oracle may be unfeasible for most. If one practices with a toy PgSQL database installation, will that help much when trying to work with Oracle later? Granted, explaining this to the HR drones may be an effective filter against finding jobs, but it seems like something that techies would be more prone to appreciate. Put another way, a little bird tells me that a certain large [huge, no really] east coast (USA) newspaper uses Oracle for their web site's live ad delivery, but clones all the data in-house on near-identical PostgreSQL servers, and apparently it works quite well for them -- to the extent that in principle they should be able to run the same ad system all with PostgreSQL servers if they ever chose to do so. I've never read any PostgreSQL / SQL Server comparisons. Supposedly SQL Server is pretty nice software, but it would be interesting to see a comparison of it, Oracle, PostgreSQL, MySQL, and maybe some of the others [DB2, Sybase, and so on]. In particular, and more off-topic for L.pm, it would be interesting to see how well these engines do when running Perl against them. But of course, because the big vendors seem to have terminal benchmark-a-phobia, this never seems to be available... -- Chris Devers[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:43:32PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: But is it safe to say that in some ways -- and for most things that one would be likely to do while learning at home, perhaps *all* ways -- Oracle and PostgreSQL can be treated as if they are interchangeable? Depends what you want to learn. If you want to learn how to write code that uses an RDBMS backend - then yeah, you'll be able to get away with using pg. Put another way, Oracle skills may be more marketable, but paying for the right licenses hardware to learn Oracle may be unfeasible for most. They used to do a free hobbyist/evaluation licence. Probably still do. -- David Cantrell | Member of the Brute Squad | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Us Germans take our humour very seriously -- German cultural attache talking to the Today Programme, about the German supposed lack of a sense of humour, 29 Aug 2001
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, David Cantrell wrote: On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:43:32PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: Put another way, Oracle skills may be more marketable, but paying for the right licenses hardware to learn Oracle may be unfeasible for most. They used to do a free hobbyist/evaluation licence. Probably still do. I'm sure this is still true, but the hardware is relevant as well. I've put copies of Pg on pretty old equipment it ran tolerably well -- good enough to put sample databases in, write code against it, etc. I've tried putting the demo version of Oracle on somewhat better hardware (sorry, it's been a while I forget all specs) and, aside from the fact that setting everything up was much more of a pain, the strain on the machine was much more noticeable than when running Pg, subjectively speaking, to the extent that I never bothered using it much. Then again, working past that ramp-up may be the whole point... -- Chris Devers[EMAIL PROTECTED] Q: What is orange and goes click, click? A: A ball point carrot.
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 05:43:32PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, Walt Mankowski wrote: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:39:45AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? Be careful with your terminology. Oracle is Oracle; SQL Server is Microsoft's RDBMS. Having said that, the main commercial benefit is that there are a hell of a lot more Oracle shops in the world than PostgreSQL shops. But is it safe to say that in some ways -- and for most things that one would be likely to do while learning at home, perhaps *all* ways -- Oracle and PostgreSQL can be treated as if they are interchangeable? In terms of actually writing and testing code, for most projects the difference is probably almost nothing - you could very quickly cross-train yourself. Unfortunately most IT managers probably share a very simple (yet understandable, and in some cases, defendable) point of view - Oracle good, some toy OSS thing bad. Going to interview for an Oracle-related job and quoting Postgress experience is almost certainly a non-starter unless you're a very fast talker or the employer is one of the very rare few that actually knows what they're doing. On a side-note, there are enormous numbers of people whose entire career consists of Oracle DBA or Oracle Consultant, many of whom are entirely ignorant of concepts I would consider fundamental to the role. I wonder if there's anyone who is an official Postgress DBA who is not really doing a load of sysadmin/developer work as well? Perhaps PG shops are enlightened enough not to require a scapegoat for database problems?
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 06:49:52PM -0500, Chris Devers wrote: I've tried putting the demo version of Oracle on somewhat better hardware (sorry, it's been a while I forget all specs) and, aside from the fact that setting everything up was much more of a pain, the strain on the machine was much more noticeable than when running Pg, subjectively speaking, to the extent that I never bothered using it much. You really do have to throw one honkin' chunk o' RAM at it. Not to mention disk space for the install; 9i is over a gig download. Further, Oracle is extremely tunable, one of its strengths (or weaknesses depending how much reading you like to do). You can diddle with about every conceivable parameter some of which in some circumstances can make a dramatic difference. Its connection cost is quite high but the client caching is pretty good (from what I've read). Of course, the conspiracy theorists would claim this is to keep DBA consultants in business... Paul -- Paul Makepeace ... http://paulm.com/ What is pauls last name? A yearning deep inside your soul. -- http://paulm.com/toys/surrealism/
RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
Title: RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration Hhhhm, I'm worried by statements like this :- How close is PostgreSQL to Oracle in terms of its SQL capabilities? It's done everything that I've expected it to. Triggers and SPs can be written in several languages with PostgreSQL. Including Perl, assuming you're entirely mad. Actually, it's not _that_ bad, but still not something I'd want to use in production. Is PostgreSQL ever going to be a database you'd bet the company on ? Mark ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:28:49AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Is PostgreSQL ever going to be a database you'd bet the company on ? I have. I won. I wouldn't use the Perl-embedded-statements in Postgres in a production server, because there's no equivalent of mod_perl, so you're stuck with interpretation overheads. But Postgres itself? No problem. Roger
RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
Title: RE: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? I'm just looking at my next private own-time project ? Cheers, Mark. -Original Message- From: Roger Burton West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 18 November 2002 10:27 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:28:49AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Is PostgreSQL ever going to be a database you'd bet the company on ? I have. I won. I wouldn't use the Perl-embedded-statements in Postgres in a production server, because there's no equivalent of mod_perl, so you're stuck with interpretation overheads. But Postgres itself? No problem. Roger ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 11:39:45AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Good, is there any real commercial benefit to an individual acquiring a good knowledge of PostgreSQL rather than Oracle SQLServer ? PostgreSQL doesn't go out of its way to make things difficult for the programmer. Therefore there isn't as much of a price premium on PostgreSQL as there is on Oracle; more people can do it. Roger
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 09:28:49AM -, Mark Buckle wrote: Hhhhm, I'm worried by statements like this :- How close is PostgreSQL to Oracle in terms of its SQL capabilities? It's done everything that I've expected it to. Triggers and SPs can be written in several languages with PostgreSQL. Including Perl, assuming you're entirely mad. Actually, it's not _that_ bad, but still not something I'd want to use in production. Is PostgreSQL ever going to be a database you'd bet the company on ? Mark Actually, it worked better for us than the commercial database previously used (Informix), when I worked for Pracom. At Netcraft Australia, Postgresql *is* the database they bet the company on, as you put -- and Postgresql and Netcraft Australia won, bigtime. I wouldn't use anything else these days - I have heard that Oracle is better in some undefineable way when used with very large datasets or in some circumstances, but I'm yet to encounter any of these situations while working for nationwide companies. I'd be very interested to hear if anyone has actually had real life situations where Postgresql just 'wasn't good enough'. -- and where the Postgresql DB was implemented well. TJC
Re: MySQL - PostgreSQL migration
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 05:30:52PM +, Paul Makepeace wrote: Does anyone here have experience using both MySQL and PostgreSQL to some reasonable degree they could offer tips or anecdotes on moving from one t'other? I'd be interested in any other comparative experiences too like speed, ease of use, etc. MySQL is faster, easier, less reliable and less capable. Going from MySQL to PostgreSQL is pretty easy, you just need to be careful about permissions on tables and using sequences instead of auto_increments. Going the other way is far too much like hard work. How close is PostgreSQL to Oracle in terms of its SQL capabilities? It's done everything that I've expected it to. Triggers and SPs can be written in several languages with PostgreSQL. plpgsql is not *quite* identical to pl/sql, but it's pretty damned close. It lacks some of the more esoteric features of Oracle of course, but still runs faster than Oracle on skimpy hardware. I haven't had a chance to compare them against each other running on big beastly machines. -- David Cantrell|Reprobate|http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david Perl may be the best solution for processing a text file, but asking a group of Perl Mongers clearly isn't -- aef, in #london.pm
