Success -- MySQL / MyODBC install

[michael d hoskins]

Well said.  I just wasn't being too specific about speed, features,
recoverability, etc.  I'd agree with all that, except for one part.

I think MySQL is far advanced in database features, scalability,
programming languages, stability, speed, fault tolerance, etc. to
Access, Foxpro, and Filemaker Pro, so I don't think it's directly
comparable to them.

MySQL is ultra fast for small to many medium-sized databases, and
usually annihilates just about anything else.  Postgres might actually
be faster for small to medium databases, compared to Oracle and the
other "big guys."  For really large databases, the big guys (on
appropriate hardware and with proper tuning,) will almost certainly
annhiliate MySQL and Postgres.  And they can certainly scale far beyond
MySQL and Postgres.

If I was to rank it based on the "industrial-strength" scale:
Oracle, DB/2, Sybase, Informix
SQL Server 7 (and Interbase?)
Postgres, SQL Server 6
MySQL
mSQL
Access, Foxpro
Filemaker Pro

(My "industrial-strength scale," of course, is "not to scale."  :-)

If we want to rank on speed, under certain conditions, MySQL would
easily be at the top, probably followed by Foxpro and (maybe) next would
be Informix -- who knows?  (The "there are three kinds of liars" saying
is running through my head, since benchmarks/stats always lie.)  All
that certainly is non-scientific, and your mileage may vary, yada,
yada...

Oh, I forgot to add that triggers are missing in MySQL, which can be a
problem.  MySQL expects programmers to implement features, as opposed to
the database.  It would be nice to at least have some API's and a
standard MySQL library that implements many of these things outside the
database to balance speed and features.

Small to medium web sites could, probably should, and do use MySQL.

-----Original Message-----
From: watts [mailto:watts at jayhawks.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 3:42 PM
To: kclug
Cc: watts
Subject: RE: kclug - Success -- MySQL / MyODBC install

On Thu, 6 Apr 2000, michael d hoskins wrote:

> left out for speed and size considerations.  As a result, don't expect
> is scale like an Oracle or a DB/2.  Now Postgres has all of this, I
> think, and it's truly free, but it's so much slower that you gotta
> strongly consider MySQL.

Note that PostgreSQL's performance is on par with Oracle, though it
doesn't scale as well on the very high end.  PostgreSQL compares very
favorably to real DBMSes -- you have to realize that MySQL is not
directly
comparable to Oracle, InterBase, nor PostgreSQL -- it's directly
comparable to products like Access, Foxpro, and Filemaker Pro.

Jeffrey.

o-----------------------------------o
| Jeffrey Watts                     |
| watts at jayhawks.net            o-------------------------------------o
| Systems Programmer            | "I wonder if other dogs think       |
| Sprint - Systems Management   |  poodles are members of a weird     |
o-------------------------------|  religious cult."                   |
|  -- Rita Rudner                     |
o-------------------------------------o