True, I know this one, but by default the other database servers support
case-insensitivity, this includes oracle, mysql, sapdb if I am not wrong
since its oracle compatible.
We had to change our application to deal with this by lowercasing all
the data which we never had a problem with in MySQL p
Referential integrity is only a small part of the relational idea. In
fact, I should mention that no database system that I know of implements
the relational idea fully. However, MySQL is just much further away than
others.
Jon
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002,
> The only thing that I dislike about Postgres is the case-sensitivity of
> data in the database, if anybody knows how to turn it off let me know.
You can use select statements like this:
select * from abc where upper(xyz) = 'SEARCH';
select * from abc where xyz ~* 'search';
POSIX Regular Express
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Jonathan Bartlett wrote:
> MySQL does not support the relational idea very well.
Sure it does. It's just that support for referential integrity is fairly
recent.
--
"Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again."
- Unknown
--
redhat-li
> i've been a fan of mysql as of late because it's simple and fast. AND the
> documentation is great. postgres is the opposite of all of the above.
ctually, the 7.x series of Postgres is quite fast. Using Postgres on an
RH system is as easy as service postgresql start; su postgres -
createuser;
ated to SAP itself?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ronald
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jonathan Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: maandag 18 november 2002 15:11
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Mysql or Postgresql
> &
tation for free.
Jon
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Ronald Hermans wrote:
> Never heart of SAP DB. Is it related to SAP itself?
>
> Cheers,
> Ronald
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: maandag 18 november 2002 15:11
>
It maybe simple and fast but you are required to do alot in the
programming end to compensate for stuff that a database server should do
for you maybe Oracle has spoilt us with triggers and the like, merge
tables are worth crap they don't work as advertised in the docs, maybe
in MySQL 4.x.
The onl
i've been a fan of mysql as of late because it's simple and fast. AND the
documentation is great. postgres is the opposite of all of the above.
On November 18, 2002 04:50 am, Shiva Haddad wrote:
> I want to have client , server database in redhat for a IP Telephone system
> product, it must be
At 11:50 PM 11/17/02, Shiva Haddad wrote:
I want to have client , server database in redhat for a IP Telephone
system product,
it must be multi-user & ...
which one is better , Mysql or postgresql ?
From what I've read, it appears to depend on what you will do. If your
system will be largely i
wrote:
> Never heart of SAP DB. Is it related to SAP itself?
>
> Cheers,
> Ronald
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: maandag 18 november 2002 15:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Mysql or Postgres
Never heart of SAP DB. Is it related to SAP itself?
Cheers,
Ronald
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: maandag 18 november 2002 15:11
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mysql or Postgresql
Before I start, let me first say that you have left out
Before I start, let me first say that you have left out two very good
open-source databases from consideration - SAP DB and Interbase. You
might look into both of these. Anyway, as to your specific question:
MySQL does not support the relational idea very well.
People do not use relational data
Given that MySQL is still unable to do things such as functions,
triggers and unions (unless you get the beta of MySQL 4 which I wouldn't
recommend) I would ask you to instead get Postgres, while it does
triggers on the whole table well its no oracle, it allows you to use
functions and pg/plsql whi
Shiva Haddad said:
> I want to have client , server database in redhat for a IP Telephone
> system product, it must be multi-user & ...
> which one is better , Mysql or postgresql ?
since redhat's 'official' database is postgres, if you are gonna
run redhat, you'll probably get the best support w
You are going to get a lot of opinion, but I believe that PostGreSQL
would be best.
On Sun, 2002-11-17 at 20:50, Shiva Haddad wrote:
> I want to have client , server database in redhat for a IP Telephone
> system product,
> it must be multi-user & ...
> which one is better , Mysql or postgresq
There is also the issue of testing and how expensive it is to fix data
that is not referentially entact. If the dbms won't let you do
something that does not make sense from a data model point of view then
a large project with many programmers will find these bugs faster and
the programming effo
On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 10:32:32AM -0600, Alan Mead wrote:
: If COMMIT and ROLLBACK are important or
: you need "true" foreign keys, then you probably need postgresql (I think
: there are workarounds on the mysql website).
You're correct with respect to support for transactions..
However, don't
On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Jason Costomiris wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 04:56:18PM -0600, Ian Alexander wrote:
> :
> : Actually, you *do* need them if the need is to conform to a standard of
> : some sort that requires foreign keys.
>
> Don't confuse technological needs with political needs..
Actually, you *do* need them if the need is to conform to a standard of
some sort that requires foreign keys. I've worked for a few places where
this was the case. Granted the spec could be changed, but most times you
won't have that option.
###
Ian J. Alexander <[E
On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 02:14:16PM -0600, Alan Mead wrote:
: Is it possible to explain or define 'foreign keys' in a couple sentences?
: As they were describe in "The Linux Database" (which was not a book I
: liked), they seemed awefully useful and important for any non-trivial,
: real-world datab
On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 04:56:18PM -0600, Ian Alexander wrote:
:
: Actually, you *do* need them if the need is to conform to a standard of
: some sort that requires foreign keys.
Don't confuse technological needs with political needs.. :)
--
Jason Costomiris <><
At 11:02 PM 1/15/00 -0600, you wrote:
>anyone knows which sql database server is better? I recently printed out
>the Postgresql HOWTO, but after reading its very emotional statements, I
>kind of get confused. Is mySQL better?
FWIW, I researched this and decided I could use whichever was easier to
At 10:52 PM 1/16/00 -0800, Rahim Valiani wrote:
>I have rh 6.1. But I am not sure if there is an easy way to get mysql
>functionality into my version of apache. Can I install an rpm for this?
Go to the MySQL website and read the documentation. They have RPMs and
tell you which you need. One of
On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 10:52:32PM -0800, Rahim Valiani wrote:
: I have rh 6.1. But I am not sure if there is an easy way to get mysql
: functionality into my version of apache. Can I install an rpm for this?
Apache doesn't talk to MySQL, unless you're talking about mod_auth_mysql
or mod_log_mysq
I have rh 6.1. But I am not sure if there is an easy way to get mysql
functionality into my version of apache. Can I install an rpm for this?
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Jason Costomiris wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 04:18:10PM +1100, Greg W wrote:
> : PostgreSQL is more functional, or rather has mo
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 16/01/00 at 9:16 Jason Costomiris wrote:
>On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 04:18:10PM +1100, Greg W wrote:
>: PostgreSQL is more functional, or rather has more functions, its also
open
>: source, MySQL is maybe smaller and faster, but has a different lic
>:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 11:38:29AM +1100, Hossein S. Zadeh wrote:
: On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Jason Costomiris wrote:
:
: > I just wish the PHP functions for pgsql were as easy to work with as
: > the mysql ones.
:
: I always thought there was a 1-to-1 relationship between PHP
: database functions??
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Jason Costomiris wrote:
> I just wish the PHP functions for pgsql were as easy to work with as
> the mysql ones.
I always thought there was a 1-to-1 relationship between PHP
database functions?? Am I wrong?
Hossein
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscr
On Sun, Jan 16, 2000 at 04:18:10PM +1100, Greg W wrote:
: PostgreSQL is more functional, or rather has more functions, its also open
: source, MySQL is maybe smaller and faster, but has a different lic
: agreement, also not as complete as PostgreSQL
:
: I am not really sure why people persist w
PostgreSQL is more functional, or rather has more functions, its also open
source, MySQL is maybe smaller and faster, but has a different lic
agreement, also not as complete as PostgreSQL
I am not really sure why people persist with MySQL
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 15/01/00 a
31 matches
Mail list logo
