Slashdot Mirror
Major Changes To MySQL Coming Soon
Meltr writes: "This ZDNET article details some of the coming changes to the MySQL database server. In 4.0, to be released in mid-October: 'support for the Unicode character set, the SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) protocol, embedded database links and multitable updates' and in 4.1, to be released in December: 'nested queries and stored procedures'."
I'm just looking forward to being able to tune the FULLTEXT search function without recompiling the database server!
It sounds great, MySQL it is trying to implement many features that were missed without loosing speed.
You can have a look to these comparison between Mysql-PostgreSQL and other open source databases.
Ok you can have a look to these comparisons: -http://www.mysql.com/doc/M/y/MySQL-PostgreSQL_fea tures.html
-http://www.geocities.com/mailsoftware42/db/
-http://www.mmlabx.ua.es/mysql-postgres.html (Spanish)
-http://openacs.org/philosophy/why-not-mysql.html
-http://phd.pp.ru/Software/SQL/PostgreSQL-vs-MySQL .html
-http://www.mysql.com/information/crash-me.php
Exactly! Take a look at http://www.mysql.com/doc/B/r/Broken_Foreign_KEY.ht ml and see why they don't have foreign key support yet. They simply say it's scheduled for inclusion in the "near future" (I'm not sure what their definition of "near" is, but that page has been up for months now, and foreign key support still isn't slated for 4.0 or 4.1). Don't hold your breath, and either switch to a real rdbms (a la pgsql), or continue to work around mysql's deficiencies on an app-by-app basis.
phppgadmin
- daniel
Turn off your computer and go outside
Have to say I 100% agree with this guy. PostgreSQL is light years ahread of MySQL, and is 100% open source. The GPL'ed version of MySQL isn't even free software! (The GPL version i always a subverions or two behind, I believe.) Why people continue to use it when PostgeSQL is out there defies all logic IMHO.
What you're forgetting is that in many web-based applications, the data *doesn't matter* (not more than nightly backups will take care of, anyway). MySQL is perfect for a whole range of web-related work, and these new additions will make it even more useful.
Except that you are forgetting that multiple recently published scores indicate that MySQL really stinks for this type of work too unless it's ALL read only access. Once you start throwing writes into the mix, MySQL falls far behind. On top of that, MySQL also has concurrent access load issues too. This means it's not going to scale very well when lots of connections are asking for lots of differing types of data from lots of different tables. Yes, it's VERY fast for one or two people (or even a small handful) doing read only access, however, use it in an environment where there are even some writes in a highly loaded system, PstgreSQL is going to beat it, not just with a stick but a full blown Loui Slugger. Once you get into the world of having a large number of writes, MySQL becomes an utter joke as PostgreSQL has lots of optimizations to take advantage of this while MySQL just rolls into a ball and cries. Of course, I've also read lots stating the PostgreSQL's query optimizer is much more advanced, so once you start doing non-trivial queries, PostgreSQL is going to win again. This will be come significantly important once (if) MySQL starts supporting sub-queries.
The point being, MySQL really isn't a great DB system after all. It may get there one day but the number of situations that it truely works well in and MySQL can address are actually very limited and nitche areas.
I keep on seeing the same statement, over and over, saying:
"I don't understand why MySQL is so popular, the only thing it has going for it is tha it's easier to install!"
Answer...staring...right...at...you.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.