Slash Boxes
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

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Your experiences I find astonishing. As a PostgreSQL user going back some 5 years, and recently asked to port my company's application to MySQL, I find MySQL to be unbelievably opaque. Funnily, I could mirror your complaints almost exactly:
    • Why is MySQL so hard to set up? Admittedly, I'm compiling from source in our environment, but PostgreSQL just compiles and installs. MySQL takes 3 times as long to compile, and installs a load of crap like tests that I'm not interested in, even when using the clie
    • MySQL is WAY easier to install - configure, make, make install - no creating and su'ing to a special user to create the databases.

      "Why is the command line interface so appalingly bad? The help is non-existent on every instance I've connected to. psql at least gives you \h."

      myql allows you to switch, and show databases, list and describe tables and best of all quit is quit and help is help. Table names and fields are tab completed. Postgresql is grumpy and unhelpful compared. The source command allows you to

      @JAPH = qw(Hacker Perl Another Just);
      print reverse @JAPH;
      • "myql allows you to switch, and show databases, list and describe tables and best of all quit is quit and help is help."

        Just like psql, apart from quit/help.

        "Table names and fields are tab completed."

        Maybe in your version. For me, psql completes, mysql doesn't. And it gets ^W wrong to add insult to injury.

        "The source command allows you to run sql scripts without exiting and piping."

        In psql it's spelled \i. Try \? for some help on the psql commands.

        "The SQL Prompt is far easier and more powerf

        • by vek (2312) on 2006.03.02 19:35 (#46422) Journal
          he last time I looked at PostgreSQL, I liked what I saw but the lack of reliable out-of-the-box replication was a showstopper. I was quite surprised that PostgreSQL was lagging behind MySQL & Oracle in that area. PostgreSQL for me therefore is fine for simple apps on a single database host, but once you move into something a little more advanced with multiple redundant database hosts sitting behind a load balancer, replication is a must have feature.

          I just had a quick peek at the online documentation for Pg 8.1 and didn't see anything related to replication as a core functon so it would appear PostgreSQL hasn't caught up with MySQL & Oracle in that arena yet. Admittedly, I don't follow PostgreSQL development so have no idea if replication is in the works for a future version.