NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)
MySQL is there mostly from inertia now. Other than legacy compatibility, there's really no reason to use it. So for new starts, I'm trying to help set the record straight, in the NMS vs MSA manner.
Reply to This
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)
It's the same with MySQL vs PostgreSQL. People who know databases know that MySQL isn't a good database. Sure it does the job if your requirements are simple. It probably looks great if you're coming from something like MS Access, but if you're used to using a "real" relational database system like D
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)
* Transactions
We've had transactions since 3.23.34a (with InnoDB)
* Sub-selects
* Stored procedures
Maybe what I generally do with MySQL isn't that complicated but I've managed to survive without both. Sub-selects are working in 4.1 and stored procedures in 5.0.
* Referential integrity
FOREIGN KEY added in 3.23.43b
There is a lot of interesting things on the horizon for MySQL users, especially due to the merging with SAP DB. You can use MaxDB which has a lot of these features working now.
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)
But, as I understand it, you lose a lot of the speed if you use them.
Stored procedures are essential (IMO) if you will have more than one client application connecting to the database. Otherwise you'll have the same business logic implemente
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:1)
That's fair, but Randal's point is that SQLite and PostgreSQL have superseded MySQL at the things MySQL is good at. If I were to apply your rule above to that situation, I could fairly claim that SQLite and PostgreSQL are getting there but MySQL is already there and has been for some time.
Is that a facile analysis? Absolutely.
Still, the whole debate seems to be that "MySQL doesn't hav
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:1)
While I think this statement is a hundred percent correct... It is only half the story.
I have never used PostgreSQL, for one simple reason.
I have not needed it.
Inertial? Sure.
But, until the benefits justify the cost, it doesn't make sense to spend my time replacing something that "just works" for me.
Sometimes "good enough" really is...
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:1)
That's a terrible analogy. It's no secret that Matt's scripts are poorly written (is MySQL poorly written?), with no support (does MySQL have support?), numerous security flaws (is MySQL insecure?), and no active development (has MySQL stopped progressing?).
I'll tell you reasons to use it over PostgreSQL: better support on Windows, nicer client interface, better documentation, from the project itself as well as from third parties, and a much saner upgrade scheme. I also hear that its replication support
Re:It's like "Matt Wright" vs "NMS" though (Score:2)