Обсуждение: MySQL vs. PostgreSQL on Slashdot

Anyone read this?  Thoughts?

Doesn't seem all that unbiased to me.  I don't recommend posting to their thread, since it would be a holy war.  But it's interesting to read people's thoughts about what's important in a database.  i.e. speed rules over data integrity.

Jeffrey Webster wrote:
> Anyone read this?  Thoughts?
>
> Doesn't seem all that unbiased to me.  I don't recommend posting to
> their thread, since it would be a holy war.  But it's interesting to
> read people's thoughts about what's important in a database.  i.e. speed
> rules over data integrity.

The comparison is totally outdated. Even back then it was not accurate,
neither on MySQL nor on PostgreSQL. As for speed over data integrity,
MySQL users have become accustomed to making these trade off's, which
does make MySQL a better fit for some projects. I dont really see any
lesson for PostgreSQL in there though.

regards,
Lukas

Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Jeffrey Webster wrote:
> > Anyone read this?  Thoughts?
> >
> > Doesn't seem all that unbiased to me.  I don't recommend posting to
> > their thread, since it would be a holy war.  But it's interesting to
> > read people's thoughts about what's important in a database.  i.e. speed
> > rules over data integrity.
>
> The comparison is totally outdated. Even back then it was not accurate,
> neither on MySQL nor on PostgreSQL. As for speed over data integrity,
> MySQL users have become accustomed to making these trade off's, which
> does make MySQL a better fit for some projects. I dont really see any
> lesson for PostgreSQL in there though.

I thought the Slashdot comments were almost universally stating the
article was outdated, biased, and that PostgreSQL feature are
significant.

--
  Bruce Momjian   bruce@momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Jeffrey Webster wrote:

> Anyone read this?  Thoughts?
>
> Doesn't seem all that unbiased to me.  I don't recommend posting to
> their thread, since it would be a holy war.  But it's interesting to
> read people's thoughts about what's important in a database.  i.e.
> speed rules over data integrity.
>
It's comparing Postgres 7.2 (seriously ancient) vr.s MySql 5.0
(modern).  It's also 2+ years old.

I don't generally bother to read the comments on /. anymore ("In Soviet
Russia, the comments read you!"), but I did in this case.  What's
interesting is, at least when I read them, all the comments that had
been modded up to at least +3 where pro-postgres and/or ripping this
article a new one.

Brian

Brian Hurt wrote:
> Jeffrey Webster wrote:
>
>> Anyone read this?  Thoughts?
>>
>> Doesn't seem all that unbiased to me.  I don't recommend posting to
>> their thread, since it would be a holy war.  But it's interesting to
>> read people's thoughts about what's important in a database.  i.e.
>> speed rules over data integrity.
>>
> It's comparing Postgres 7.2 (seriously ancient) vr.s MySql 5.0
> (modern).  It's also 2+ years old.

Yeah, despite the fact that it acknowledges that 8.0 exists (or would
have done shortly).

The comment that made me chuckle though was:

Oracle has an expert named Tom - asktom.oracle.com - who is a genius and
answers all my questions. Postgres has an expert, also named Tom, who is
a genius and answers all my questions on the newsgroup.

  -Angvaw

Regards, Dave.