Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic

Re^3: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

by doom (Deacon)
on Jul 10, 2008 at 23:30 UTC ( #696859=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects
in thread [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

If you want to compare apples with apples, compare the *newest* version of Postgres (8.3) with the *newest* version of MySQL

Cool idea. Why not get to work on it? Myself, I'd love to spend the next year working on database benchmarks and reliability tests just so I can have an informed opinion in a geek debate. Of course, no one will actually pay any attention to you, and by the time you're done the databases you're studying will have changed some more, but what the hell.

and ignore the non-inno backends.

You mean, pretend that most people aren't using the default?

It does surprisingly well.

Ah, so you do have some data? You've compared the results with both databases, then? What was surprising about your results?

Pg still has so much room for improvement, and it certainly isn't the easiest of the two to develop in.

And where would that "room for improvement" be, precisely? I can't imagine why you'd find it harder to develop for than any other database.

(Department of cheap irony: hit a "database error" when I first tried to post this.)

  • Comment on Re^3: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects
by EvanCarroll (Chaplain) on Jul 13, 2008 at 08:03 UTC
    Inno is the default for a backend *that requires transactions* and has been for a while. The assumption is simply that the most typical use of database will not require transactions -- which is probably true if you follow the mindset that a hash functions better as an api into a database. And, if your argument is on the lines of being informed costs too much time.. then just do us all a favor and remain silent.

    MySQL has a pseudo-SQL interface into the DB which is more uniform for a new user. I'm also told from people that use MySQL replication that it is easier to manage -- and it works off the shelf without having to install a contrib module. MySQL still has more functionality in the CSV libraries. And, MySQL supported fts (without contrib modules) before pg. There are a ton of other things, like "AUTO INCREMENT" makes more sense than "serial" -- and if you give write access to a table in Postgres you assume you can insert into, but not if it has a serial datatype, because that creates a index. An Index is incremented on the write, therefore the index too has to be +w.

    MySQL supports SQL extensions for mere convenience which Pg has a higher resistance to permitting. See "INSERT ignore INTO ...", "ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE", and

    Evan Carroll
    I hack for the ladies.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://696859]
and a moth chases the moon...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (4)
As of 2018-05-28 05:28 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?