Re: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-14 Thread Jeremy Zawodny
On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 12:54:33PM +0100, Robert Sundström wrote: > > I have done some admittedly not-so-scientific testing on MySQL (both > with MyISAM and InnoDB) to find that both combinations performs best > in single user systems. That shouldn't surprise anyone. There little if any content

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-14 Thread Brian Aker
On Thu, 2001-12-13 at 03:54, Robert Sundström wrote: > queries, with medium sized transactions (3-5 statements per transaction, > where transactions was supported). On my regular desktop box I was able to > get about 700 statements per second using MyISAM and about two thirds of > that using In

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-13 Thread Heikki Tuuri
Robert, >-Original Message- >From: Robert Sundstrvm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: quinta-feira, 13 de Dezembro de 2001 11:55To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle >At 04:23 2001-12-02 , you wrote: >>Not sure that total users is a good metric; quer

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-13 Thread Sinisa Milivojevic
Robert Sundström writes: > > Most stable commercial products exposes the opposite behavior. It may be > the case that MySQL performs pretty well in single (or few) user cases, but > the commercial alternatives will, in my experience, in most cases beat > MySQL on 3-5 users and above. > Only

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-13 Thread Luis Ferro
pound! -Original Message- From: Robert Sundstrvm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: quinta-feira, 13 de Dezembro de 2001 11:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle At 04:23 2001-12-02 , you wrote: >Not sure that total users is a good metric; queries per second may be >better. >

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-13 Thread Robert Sundström
At 04:23 2001-12-02 , you wrote: >Not sure that total users is a good metric; queries per second may be >better. > >We host web sites and use MySQL with MyISAM tables for small and >medium-sized sites, Oracle for the big ones. Oracle's row-level locking >abilities make a big, deciding difference f

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-01 Thread Weaver, Walt
Not sure that total users is a good metric; queries per second may be better. We host web sites and use MySQL with MyISAM tables for small and medium-sized sites, Oracle for the big ones. Oracle's row-level locking abilities make a big, deciding difference for the bigger, more active sites. Oracl

Re: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-01 Thread Gordan Bobic
> We are currently using MySQL for our database driven website. Currently, > we have about 100,000 users. In January, we will be getting 2 million > new registered users on our website. Yes, but how many hits are you expecting, and what sort of queries will be ran? > We're buying a $50,000 Sun

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-01 Thread Heikki Tuuri
Hi! Look at the InnoDB/MySQL user stories at http://www.innodb.com 1200 queries per second on a single processor Intel box is easy to attain. A terabyte of data is handled at an InnoDB/MySQL site. InnoDB is close to Oracle in architecture. Regards, Heikki http://www.innodb.com -- Order commer

RE: MySQL v.s. Oracle

2001-12-01 Thread Todd Williamsen
MySQL is faster than any other database out there on small to medium sized web sites, but when you are going into larger sites, like yours, Oracle or MS SQL Server will be better suited for the task. Oracle does have one major draw back Price... For your size, you will spend in the neighborh