On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Henrik Edlund wrote:
And while we are discussing not cutting corners, those who still use
MySQL should switch to a real DBMS before they even think of abstracting
the SQL away from their Perl code.
That people still use MySQL really shows how many lusers there are with
Hi guys,
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Philip Mak wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Henrik Edlund wrote:
And while we are discussing not cutting corners, those who still use
MySQL should switch to a real DBMS before they even think of abstracting
What would you consider to be a real DBMS?
Guys,
At 4:27 PM -0400 8/1/01, Philip Mak wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Henrik Edlund wrote:
And while we are discussing not cutting corners, those who still use
MySQL should switch to a real DBMS before they even think of abstracting
the SQL away from their Perl code.
That people still use MySQL
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Philip Mak wrote:
PM What would you consider to be a real DBMS? Sybase and Oracle obviously,
PM but I actually am the hypothetical programmer with a 233MHz machine with
PM 64 MB RAM (hey, it runs emacs fine :/) on a shoestring budget who is
PM mostly limited to using freeware
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Philip Mak wrote:
On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Henrik Edlund wrote:
And while we are discussing not cutting corners, those who still use
MySQL should switch to a real DBMS before they even think of abstracting
the SQL away from their Perl code.
That people still use
ok my 5c,
My vote is for Interbase. Why ?
+small runtime size
+zero administration
+FK with CASCADE
+I think it runs on more platforms than any other DB
+SUSPEND in stored procs
+stored procs can be used in FORM clause
+can run on less-powerfull PC's
Personaly I've used it on Win95, Win98,
