Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PostgreSQL Inc. Open Sources Replication Solution

Posted by michael on from the postgres-postgres dept.

Martin Marvinski writes "PostgreSQL Inc, the commercial company providing replication software and support for PostgreSQL, open sourced their eRServer replication product. This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle as the de facto RDBMS standard. More information can be found on PostgreSQL's website."

3 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Re:mySQL gets more publicity by Manic+Ken · · Score: 0, Troll

    Ahh....Monsters statistics also have more jobs for M$ software, so therefore it must be the future!???

    There is naught, nor ought there be nothing so exalted on the face of God's grey earth as that prince of databases....PostgreSQL!! (and Mimer).

  2. Re:mySQL gets more publicity by AVee · · Score: 1, Troll

    The difference isn't in the publicity. mySql is the dumber database and therefore used by the people that don't understand things like transactions etc. Just like their are still people developing applications on top of access databases and most of them are feeling very smart and think they understand databases...

  3. The myth of transactions by ajs · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm from an Oracle background, so I want to take this away from being about MySQL or any other DB. However, your statement about transactions really gets to me.

    I work hard when I write code that talks to a database to NEVER use transactions or rollback unless there is just no way around it (and while I've come up with some hypothetical situations where that would happen, I've never run into them in the real world).

    The problem with transactions is that they cultivate an attitude about your data which is very, very dangerous. I can't count how many reasonable-looking applications have caused untold damage because the developer stopped thinking about the consequences of their actions.

    By forcing myself to deal with those consequences manually by doing my own locking and my own data-integrety management, I find that I can rely on my data far more than most people can, and the likelihood that one of my programs is going to "go bad" and rip out whole transactional units just because an non-essential field was initialized oddly is much, much lower.

    Now, of course, going back to MySQL, you have the option today: do you want to use transactions? If so, your schema will reflect that, and you'll take the performance hit that everyone else does when you enable them. I never do, but you're welcome to. That's what software should be all about: giving the user all of the choices they need.

    All that said, I love PostgreSQL, and I hope that both databases continue to kick the commercial databases' butts for decades to come!