RE: Marketing materials ??
My point was that unless you were worried about tens of thousands of simultaneous connections, MySQL is a better choice in terms of costs. If you are worried about tens of thousands of connections, MS-SQL still isn't a good solution because it won't handle the load and it will cost even more money; one lot to convert to MS-SQL, another lot to convert to Oracle because Oracle can handle the load. The reason I brought Oracle up in the first place is because a properly tuned Oracle database will outperform everybody in high load conditions. Twenty five years of experience tends to give people a bit of an edge when designing databases ;) John -Original Message- From: Jeremy Zawodny [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 5:49 PM To: John Griffin Cc: Yuri; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Marketing materials ?? On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 10:15:05AM -0400, John Griffin wrote: Hi Yuri, Money talks. Point out that MySQL is an open source initiative and can save them money. As for knowing another product, such as MS-SQL, being a deciding factor; it really isn't an issue. All databases, at their core functionality, are the same. The same rules of database design apply to all databases. There is a SQL standard that all databases conform to (to varying degrees). All backups, etc. still need to done regardless of the database. In fact, the only real differentiator that management should worry about is scalability. If your management is worried about thousands of simultaneous requests (i.e. 25,000) than I would suggest you look at an Oracle solution. You lost me on that last part. The hardware required to make Oracle handle 25,000 connections efficiently is FAR more expensive than for MySQL. Money talks, right? Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 3.23.51: up 43 days, processed 914,113,484 queries (242/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Marketing materials ??
There was a comparison run on eweek.com a few months ago that tested the top databases, including MySQL, using a JDBC interface. Oracle came on top, as you would expect, and it should for the money. MySQL was second, MSSQL was dead last. All were professionally tuned as I recall. However, MSSQL was the fastest by quite a margin if you dropped the JDBC connector and used all Microsoft technologies, front, middle and back ends. Not a setup I would like, but some might find it comforting. I think they had all databases running under Windows. You would probably get far better performance running the other databases under Unix, which is a nice option to have. On Thursday, September 19, 2002, at 07:50 AM, John Griffin wrote: The reason I brought Oracle up in the first place is because a properly tuned Oracle database will outperform everybody in high load conditions. -- Brent Baisley Systems Architect Landover Associates, Inc. Search Advisory Services for Advanced Technology Environments p: 212.759.6400/800.759.0577 - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: Marketing materials ??
Hi Yuri, Money talks. Point out that MySQL is an open source initiative and can save them money. As for knowing another product, such as MS-SQL, being a deciding factor; it really isn't an issue. All databases, at their core functionality, are the same. The same rules of database design apply to all databases. There is a SQL standard that all databases conform to (to varying degrees). All backups, etc. still need to done regardless of the database. In fact, the only real differentiator that management should worry about is scalability. If your management is worried about thousands of simultaneous requests (i.e. 25,000) than I would suggest you look at an Oracle solution. John -Original Message- From: Yuri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 5:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Marketing materials ?? Hi, I may get in position to protect my choice of MySQL being confronted by completely non-technical management. Management is likely to argue in favor of MSSQL (nice GUI, many people who know it, they are used to it, you can do any project on any DB, blah blah blah). All this crap. Anyone has web references to different DB servers comparison (performance/feature-rich /other...)? Marketing materials/diagrams/tables that would be able to convince non-tech guys that MySQL is superior to MSSQL? Selling points (like ease of administration, high performance, robustness of SQL language, cross platform-nnes) ? Any other considerations. I mean I know by heart that MySQL is better but management has totally different mindset. So any such convincing information will be GREATLY appreciated )) Yuri. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Marketing materials ??
On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 10:15:05AM -0400, John Griffin wrote: Hi Yuri, Money talks. Point out that MySQL is an open source initiative and can save them money. As for knowing another product, such as MS-SQL, being a deciding factor; it really isn't an issue. All databases, at their core functionality, are the same. The same rules of database design apply to all databases. There is a SQL standard that all databases conform to (to varying degrees). All backups, etc. still need to done regardless of the database. In fact, the only real differentiator that management should worry about is scalability. If your management is worried about thousands of simultaneous requests (i.e. 25,000) than I would suggest you look at an Oracle solution. You lost me on that last part. The hardware required to make Oracle handle 25,000 connections efficiently is FAR more expensive than for MySQL. Money talks, right? Jeremy -- Jeremy D. Zawodny | Perl, Web, MySQL, Linux Magazine, Yahoo! [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jeremy.zawodny.com/ MySQL 3.23.51: up 43 days, processed 914,113,484 queries (242/sec. avg) - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: Marketing materials ??
- Original Message - From: Yuri [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 12:37 AM Subject: Marketing materials ?? Hi, I may get in position to protect my choice of MySQL being confronted by completely non-technical management. Management is likely to argue in favor of MSSQL (nice GUI, many people who know it, they are used to it, you can do any project on any DB, blah blah blah). All this crap. Anyone has web references to different DB servers comparison (performance/feature-rich /other...)? Marketing materials/diagrams/tables that would be able to convince non-tech guys that MySQL is superior to MSSQL? Selling points (like ease of administration, high performance, robustness of SQL language, cross platform-nnes) ? MySQL runs on Unix and Windows, MS SQL Server only on Windows. These are the best references so far: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,293,00.asp http://www.eweek.com/slideshow/0,3018,sid=0s=1590a=23120,00.asp Any other considerations. I mean I know by heart that MySQL is better but management has totally different mindset. So any such convincing information will be GREATLY appreciated )) Yuri. Best regards, Heikki sql query - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
