This is the follow up for my post a few days ago. First I want to thank
everybody for their great replies. I must admit that I did ask the same
question in MySQL list and also had many replies. From their perspective
the only thing that PostgreSQL has and MySQL does not have is more
features. In fact here's a short summary of the ideas from MySQL list:
-MySQL is simple, powerful, indestructible.
-PostgreSQL is very highly featured, but not as fast and not as rugged.
-MySQL ran on NT with no fuss, while you needed cygwin and whatnot to
run PostgreSQL.
-PostgreSQL seemed to require more administration than MySQL.
-If you need to work with extremely large databases (multi GB) I would
go with MySQL. It scales to large files extremely well.
-There seems to be much less support for PostgreSQL than MySQL, be it
from books or other users.
-MySQL has better support, larger community and better documentation.
These are randomly orderered and posted by various MySQL list users. I
thought it would be nice for part 2 to have PostgreSQL users comment
these replies.
I have been reading a little documentation and mail-lists from both
sides. I noticed one interesting thing about MySQL: there are different
table types with different properties. Why doesn't PostgreSQL have
differently oriented/optimized table types? I found particularly
intresting the heap table type which is being stored entirely in memory
not on disk drive.
Kaarel
kaarel@future.ee