Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Frank Heikens
Тема Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project
Дата
Msg-id 1316F574-BB4A-4951-A932-8F57E417E9AF@mac.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project  ("Gauthier, Dave" <dave.gauthier@intel.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Managers want support, they can't live without. Every piece of software has its flaws and needs patches. PostgreSQL is supported for 5 years, the latest version (8.4) will be supported at least until 2014. In total there are 6 supported version as we speak, 7.4 - 8.4. MySQL has active support for 5.0 and 5.1 but 5.0 will only be supported for the next two weeks and 5.1 until december next year. Unless you pay for an extended support contract. After 5.1 there is no other stable version at this moment, nobody knows what comes next.


Good luck!

Op 16 dec 2009, om 22:02 heeft Gauthier, Dave het volgende geschreven:

Hi Everyone:
 
Tomorrow, I will need to present to a group of managers (who know nothing about DBs) why I chose to use PG over MySQL in a project, MySQL being the more popular DB choice with other engineers, and managers fearing things that are “different” (risk).  I have a few hard tecnical reasons (check constraint, deferred constraint checking, array data type), but I’m looking for a “it’s more reliable” reasons.  Again, the audience is managers.  Is there an impartial,  3rd party evaluation of the 2 DBs out there that identifies PG as being more reliable?  It might mention things like fewer incidences of corrupt tables/indexes, fewer deamon crashes, better recovery after system crashes, etc... ?
 
Thanks !



В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: make check fails on OS X 10.6.2
Следующее
От: Thomas Kellerer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project