Dennis Björklund wrote:
> People just don't seem to care about the truth any more. As always there
> is of course no benchmarks. And what he means with a "full-featured SQL
> engine" I don't know.
There was a similar article (from the same publication) featured earlier comparing mysql to sql server. The only way
todebunk these and other myths is to get organized and publish some facts. Josh & I and others are talking about
generatingan open benchmark on real world data. This is the kind of press that postgres needs.
mysql enjoys a centralized marketing department and are backed up with some cash. They are just trying to make some
money,and there's nothing wrong with that. It seems to me that mysql is making some opening shots in a big tactical
pushinto the commercial database market. In their eyes, Postgres is in the way, so seeing a little FUD spread here and
thereis no surprise to me.
Everybody seems to talk which open source database is the 'Oracle Killer'; well I don't think (at this point and time)
thatthis is very realistic thinking. OTOH, it's very reasonable to fight for the position of 'SQL Server Killer'.
Sincekilling off or buying all their competitors, Microsoft has had a virtually uncontested run for small to medium
databasedeployments on the windows platform (the small business market). The mysql folks have realized this and have
giventheir windows support a reasonably high priority. IMO, this strategy has paid off in terms of a vastly increased
presencein the database technical press.
Merlin