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'."
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.
What I'd like to see is a profound comparison of mysql and postgresql. I'm a happy user of both, and I currently have pgsql serving a 8 million pageviews/month site, and handling load gracefully. AFAICare, pgsql is at least fast enough. I also never had any reliability/data loss problems with mysql, despite heavy concurrent access. AFAICare, mysql is robust enough. I'd really like to find out what are the core differences in both designs to get a grasp of how fast they may evolve.
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
Yes, why ? Mysql is a very popular free sql database system , and I still have problems figuring out why.
It supports almost none of the sql features I need. The solution to my needs(which includes free/opensource) is PostgreSQL,
which do supports the features i require(subqueries, locking, stored procedures,views,triggers,other _real_ nice features..).
One point that often comes up is that mysql is very fast, and it is fast, but atleast for my projects only silghtly faster than postgresql(2-4%),
and in many special cases posgresql is way faster.
Also the point of mysql beeing very fast disappears if you use the locking features of mysql, BDB/Innodb tables.
For me, its postgres over mysql anytime.
I am quite frightened when i see people still using MySQL ...
... (AFAIR there is no views)
...)
...)
...)
.gdb files)
... go for a powerfull database ;-)
Ok, it's a nice database but it lacks from major steps :
- fast and decent transactions
- procedures
- triggers
- views
Why do not people user alternative database such as PostgreSQL or Interbase ?
For instance insterbase and its sister projects (IB Phoenix : http://www.ibphoenix.org/ , FireBird: http://firebird.sourceforge.net ,
The basic specs of interbase are :
- full SQL92 compliant (entry level)
- not fully SQL99 compliant
For instance you have :
- fast transactions
- super fast blob/clob feature
- procedure (full SQL92 here!!!)
- trigger
- strucutred data types
- JDBC2.0 driver (type 4 JDBC3.0 is underway
- cool tools (admin, major crash fix and recovery stuffs
- easy data deployment (thru
Under linux there are 2 architecture, the classical server and the super server (cf the docs).
There are also cool and nice free GUI admin tools such as IBAccess:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ibaccess/
All these stuffs are opensourced and free (as in beer) !
No more hesitation
This is great! When I forayed into the SQL land 3 years ago I dried postgreSQL first because it was a "pure" SQL that was a true GPL and free.. but honestly, MySQL is tons easier to set up and use and program for. So that is what I settled on, it just added a step for me, I had to show a client how to download and install it to meet the license requirement at that time.. (Shoulder driving, click there, click ok, now type rpm -i *.rpm.. cool I can take over now!) I use it extensively today, and the documentation seems to be greated for MySQL than postgreSQL. Is that a fact though? is there sources for postgreSQL for dummies? or nice comprehensive manuals? or 3rd party books?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
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.
And in reply to the parent of the parent of this post, I really don't see how the term vaporware fits here. Sure, MySQL is a different class of database than (for example) Postgres, but that doesn't make it a useless product. Besides, at the rate MySQL is going these days, I wouldn't be surprised if they could be considered up to par with Postgres in a few years. If they can keep the speed up there while adding new features, the competition will have a hard time... well, competing.
-- If no truths are spoken then no lies can hide --
It goes a little like this:
1. Someone needs a small easy to install database quick.
2. Sysadmin knows PostGres is superior but also knows that MySQL is dead easy to set-up quickly. He has set up MySQL before since someone told him how easy it was. He uses that.
3. People are so impressed in the organization that he got the thing up quickly they start suggesting MySQL for larger projects where it falls flat.
4. The organization gets turned off to Open-Source databases and chooses Oracle or DB2 instead totally bypassing PostGres which is sad.
In the end PostGres gets completely bypassed. Lots of people cut their teeth on MySQL so when someone needs a small database set up really quick they choose it. If more people used PostGres initially I think they would never look back. However, I understand immediately why MySQL is used so often.
ACK
"Hatred is the coward's revenge for being intimidated"