Slashdot Mirror
MySQL 5.0 Candidate Released
Brian "Krow" Aker (Former Slashdot Coder now MySQL Employee) writes "I am pleased to announce the release candidate for MySQL 5.0. This version has been in development now for three years. We have worked to add update-able views, ansi stored procedures, and triggers. In addition we have added a number of fun features that we are experimenting with and resolved issues with bad data inserts (which personally annoyed the hell out of me when we rewrote Slashdot a couple of years back so I am happy to see this issue go away). We look forward to feedback on the candidate and will show some love for bug reports."
It's time for somebody to do a new, impartial study regarding the performance and feature benefits of this new release of MySQL, PostgreSQL, Firebird, SQLite, and perhaps other open-sourced relational databases.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Every time any database is mentioned on Slashdot we get a load of comments about how MySQL is not a "real" database because it doesn't support {insert random feature here}.
Is it a real database yet?
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
I certainly have to give them credit for one thing. The MySQL developers have been subjected to some very harsh criticism over the years, but few would accuse them of ignoring it.
It impresses me that they actually seem to be listening.
Do you like German cars?
In short:
Sounds good to me!
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
is often the better database solution, I'll still be using MySQL. Why? Well a quick search on cwjobs shows 188 jobs requiring MySQL experience vs 7 for postgres!! Its a real shame but having used the best tool (C++ Builder) for my last job and then being unemployed for @2 years because people wanted either VC++ or Unix based C++ experience; I *WONT* be making the same mistake again!
Anyways, that said, Ive already played about with 5.011 and apart from the yukky syntax one has to use to support transactions it seems quite stable. Its might have taken a long time for them to finally make it a "real" database product but it seems good enough for small databases.
One of my next jobs is to test it with 10 million + records and see how it performs though so my assessment may be premature...
The only so-called "database" that emphasizes it's GUI is Access. Every other vendor/product I'm aware of relies of separation of duties and doesn't try to roll user interfacing into what is rightly a back-end service.
Administration tools for commercial and OSS databases may be easy for small sites and novice DBA's that don't know their tools, but large applications rely on database scripts to handle configuration, not GUIs. The reason is simple: you can't put a mouse click into CVS/RCS/SCCS/???.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Most DBA's are adequate at best and most likely don't have much experience trying to squeeze every ounce of CPU out of a box. So I can understand why they do this... I personally don't take 'user' benchmarks very seriously because most times you have no idea how their environment is configured or if it is even configured properly.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
AFAIK the clustering and load balancing 'solution' for MySQL means your entire database has to fit in memory. Not very practical...
The MySQL guru at Yahoo! -- Jeremy Zawodny -- wrote an O'Reilly book on the different hacks and scrapes they needed to make MySQL perform properly. It's full of anecdotes of MySQL brainf**kery and whatnot. If you consider Yahoo! using MySQL to be an endorsement, try reading High Performance MySQL.