Re: I want to use postresql for this app, but...

Paul Thomas wrote:

> On 05/02/2004 19:33 Derek Shaw wrote:
>> I am working with a window-manufacturing firm (the real thing!).  One of
>> the reasons we are about to choose one of the vertical-market
>> applications is that they claim ODBC compliance, and "Using other ODBC
>> compliant database engines should not present a problem but may require
>> some additional testing..."  This is in stark contrast to all the other
>> vendors who require MSSQL on the back end (or an AS400), and the usual
>> windoziness about why you'd want to do anything else.
>>
>> When I asked about using PostgreSQL this is the reply I received:
>> ----
>> I discussed PostureSQL with Paul and his technical director sent me the
>> following comment:
>> /   PostgreSQL// is open source and so far they have not agreed on a blob
>>   field properly we use blob fields for the item bitmap, old conservatory
>>   data and meta files for graphics. An ODBC driver is available and
>>   describes how to fudge a blob field but it says that it does not clean
>>   them up properly when updating. I suggest moving to MySQL which
>>   is also open source ??///
>> They estimate about one day additional time to make necessary changes
>> and to test for MySQL.  Let me know what you think.
>> ----
>> These folks develop using MSAccess and MSSQL. Can anyone shed any light
>> on how serious this problem is, and whether it is ever likely to be
>> resolved so that I could use PostgreSQL?
>
> I wonder if they've got confused about the 2 ways in PostgreSQL can store
> blobs. There is the older Large Object method and there is the newer bytea
> data type. Each has its advantages and disadvantages.
> http://www.varlena.com/varlena/GeneralBits/44.php could help them
> understand which to use. Or they could ask on this list.
>
> Perhaps you should also ask them them to comment on
> http://sql-info.de/mysql. Do they believe a database which can silently
> corrupt your data is a product worth recommending to a paying client?
>

In addition to this, "also open source" is correct, but there are
significan differences in the quality of "open" vs. "open". MySQL is not
free, so if the application developed is closed source, it requires the
end user to purchase a commercial MySQL license per installation.


Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #