On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 03:30:30PM -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007, Tony Caduto wrote:
>
> >If there is any interest I could also add MySQL 5.0 to the mix as the
> >third column.
>
> As already mentioned, MyISAM and InnoDB should get their own columns.
Yes.
> This is a really good comparision, focusing on features that I think
> people understand rather than so much on technical trivia. Someone else
> mentioned moving it onto the Wiki. Questions that pop into my head:
>
> -Tony, would be you be comfortable with your work being assimilated into a
> larger table that was hosted somewhere else but credited yours as a
> source?
>
> -Is the Wiki the right place to build this table at? Large Wiki
> tables get very difficult to manage.
They're very easy to manage using things like the Firefox/Mozilla
plugin viewsourcewith
<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/394>
> It may be easier to build the table in something else and then have
> that generate markup instead. I'd rather edit this in a spreadsheet
> and write something to massage that into final form than do all the
> edits within the Wikipedia editor.
See above :)
> -If this is going to turn into the grand feature comparision table,
> everyone might as well be thinking from day one that inevitably
> there will be columns for Oracle (with a volunteer to fill out
> already), SQL Server, DB2, etc. and plan a useful way to manage all
> that data from the beginning. That's another reason why the Wiki is
> a bad way to cope with this data; adding another column is a painful
> and error-prone operation.
Could be. Try viewsourcewith with your favorite editor and see
whether it eases the pain :)
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666
Skype: davidfetter
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate