Lucky you, over here people die due to the cold if they get stuck in the snow and the car dies. -30 degrees Celsius is a real bitch if you have to sit still for a prolonged time.
Many people prefere the stretching, look at the amoung of people watching stretched 4:3 material on their widescreen tvs or the constant nag of wtf there was black bars on top and bottom if the movie when people had 4:3 tvs...
Competing? This has nothing to do with competing, by using the Swiss Railways trademark they whater down the trademark, i.e it has a big chance of loosing it's meaning as a marker for a hich precision time device into a mere "oh that is a clock".
Actually I never did, I only wrote that for my use case I didn't find PostgreSQL to be better performant than MySQL. And no I'm not unwilling to substantiate, I told you how I come to my conclusion and since it wasn't done in order to benchmark I never collected any stats. I'm completely uninterested in which dba is the fastest, I simply replyed with my anecdotal experience and what I see when we perform QA on the various databases and the experience that I have with customers different setups.
Performance comparisons is very hard to do since every task out there has different requirements, and if one combines that with the infinite ways one can configure either dbs and the underlying os then you will always fail in the eyes of some one, it's also quite common for people to choose either one of MySQL or PostgreSQL and stick with it so the experience needed to properly set the other one up for the test in hand is often lacking.
Interesting that you feel PostgreSQL easier to set up, I have the exact opposite experience:), with MySQL it's simply a "mysql -p", and then issue somce "create user x identified by " and a few "create table xx", while in PostgreSQL (at least in the older versions) one has to fuss around with local user accounts and use strange commands such as \c in order to change datbase (which is a simple "use " in MySQL. All this might have changed over the years though:-)
I would have no problem (and has no problem) using MySQL for critical data, there is nothing magic in say PostgreSQL that makes it more suitable for critical data than MySQL, neither will eat your data for no good reason.
So what you say is that PostgreSQL _must_ be better because you like it... Or could it be that you have not successfully tuned your MySQL installation when you tested it etc etc. This can go on forever and ever. You are completely free to think that PostgreSQL is the best thing out there, it just doesn't mean that MySQL is garbage or second rate like many people claim, many people who never even have used MySQL or with anything other than MyISAM tables.
All that I want to convey is that we use MySQL for business critical, write intensive data and have never experienced any problems what so ever, which is quite contrary to the "oh no you're doomed if you use MySQL" crowd.
Now I have not tested 9.2, but when we developed the application and also during QA we run it against all our supported sql servers and MySQL always have better insert/update performance (we are not select intense) then either MSSQL or PostgreSQL (which can be a too old version to be a reliable source since we use the version bundled with CentOS). But we have not performed any tuning what so ever of course since the purpose is to QA the application and not the dba.
That is left for out end customers to do, we simply supply the application that feeds a (any) sql server with our datafeed aswelll as the data feed, which sql to use and how to tune it is up to them. However we use MySQL internally which is not tuned at all (we are not DB savvy) but they perform very well and we have never had any problems with them, and they do receive our full data flow. Our customers with MSSQL servers however experiences lots of problems and they receive only a subset of the dataflow, I have never heard any problem with PostgreSQL but the one customer that we have that I know runs Postgres has a very competent DBA so I think he knows how to keep that one nice and tuned.
So my experience is that PostgreSQL might be a nice server, MySQL is definitely a good server and most things that are written about it is either FUD or from very old versions, and the one I would never ever touch with a ten foot pole is MSSQL.
Why should we listen to the rioters and believe what they say? Do you also think that we should change the legal system so that the prosecution will be silent and we should only hear the defendendts own story on why he commited the crime?
One also has to understand that many of these riots have happened in countries that are or just recently have been dictaturships for many many years. So in their reasoning no one in the US could have done this without the blessing and explicit order by the US gouvernment, and the US gouvernment would do it only as a hostile move against the muslim countries. Because that is how it worked/works in their countries. It will take many years for Libyans and Egyptions to think in democratic terms.
>Did you know that MySQL re-compiles every stored procedure in a database on every new connection?
Actually it really doesn't, it will only recompile the stored procedure if the compiled version has left the cache, so as long as they fit into the cache you would see very little compiling going on.
Very nice of the PostgreSQL developer there to run MySQL in a non strict mode and then play confused when it does exactly what he tells it to do... Perhaps it's unknown to many people, but with MySQL you can configure the database engine for different levels of SQL correctness, the default is usually to be very lenient since that is what the normal PHP user would expect (and people used to the older MyISAM storage engine). But for those who want correct SQL correctness like PostgreSQL it is possible to configure it that way.
Exactly why does it matter that MySQL got ACID first with the inclusion of InnoDB? It would only matter if you pretend that MySQL version 1.0 is the only version that you can run or something...
And yeah comparisons on the Internet is of course always true:-), whell it might be that PostgreSQL is better performant etc. It just happens that for my use case it doesn't, we provide stock market data to sql-servers among other things and the only users we have that never experience performance problems or stability problems are out MySQL user base (the ones with the most problems run MSSQL).
If you read the bug that you linked to you'll see that it was a regression that wasn't catched by the original test, i.e it was probably not a regression after all, simply that the first fix wasn't a fix for all possible cases. And it's not like there has never been any bugs or regression bugs in other dbs...
Yes seriously. We use MySQL extensively with Terabyte sizes databases with tens of thousands writes per second and have never experienced any performance or stability problems what so ever. Our customers who use MSSQL however experiences lots of troubles.
You are 100% correct, thanks to the old monopoly back in the days Microsoft can now reap the benefits for a very long time (and then one has to consider that the monopoly is still here in practice since all new computers are sold with OS included).
>Lets be honest and cut the bullshit folks...why does Windows rule the desktop? its simply because there is software that covers every niche from inventory management to medical billing, electrical supply to salvage yards, there is SOMEBODY out there making software for it and it runs on Windows.
Yes but it''s not like that because Windows was better in any way, it's only because Windows was and still is the only choice out there for people buying computers. Microsoft reaps the benefits of their old monopoly, once all the software houses wrote software for Windows they no longer needed the monopoly to maintin the #1 position because playing catch up is impossible.
Slashdot Mirror
Lucky you, over here people die due to the cold if they get stuck in the snow and the car dies. -30 degrees Celsius is a real bitch if you have to sit still for a prolonged time.
So we should assume that they do not sell the iPhone in Switzerland at all?
If you are parked for several hours due to snow you would want to use the heater atleast.
It can still be dilluted in the sense that people will associate the design not with a high precision clock but with a generic clock.
Many people prefere the stretching, look at the amoung of people watching stretched 4:3 material on their widescreen tvs or the constant nag of wtf there was black bars on top and bottom if the movie when people had 4:3 tvs...
Competing? This has nothing to do with competing, by using the Swiss Railways trademark they whater down the trademark, i.e it has a big chance of loosing it's meaning as a marker for a hich precision time device into a mere "oh that is a clock".
Actually I never did, I only wrote that for my use case I didn't find PostgreSQL to be better performant than MySQL. And no I'm not unwilling to substantiate, I told you how I come to my conclusion and since it wasn't done in order to benchmark I never collected any stats. I'm completely uninterested in which dba is the fastest, I simply replyed with my anecdotal experience and what I see when we perform QA on the various databases and the experience that I have with customers different setups.
Performance comparisons is very hard to do since every task out there has different requirements, and if one combines that with the infinite ways one can configure either dbs and the underlying os then you will always fail in the eyes of some one, it's also quite common for people to choose either one of MySQL or PostgreSQL and stick with it so the experience needed to properly set the other one up for the test in hand is often lacking.
:), with MySQL it's simply a "mysql -p", and then issue somce "create user x identified by " and a few "create table xx", while in PostgreSQL (at least in the older versions) one has to fuss around with local user accounts and use strange commands such as \c in order to change datbase (which is a simple "use " in MySQL. All this might have changed over the years though :-)
Interesting that you feel PostgreSQL easier to set up, I have the exact opposite experience
I would have no problem (and has no problem) using MySQL for critical data, there is nothing magic in say PostgreSQL that makes it more suitable for critical data than MySQL, neither will eat your data for no good reason.
So what you say is that PostgreSQL _must_ be better because you like it... Or could it be that you have not successfully tuned your MySQL installation when you tested it etc etc. This can go on forever and ever. You are completely free to think that PostgreSQL is the best thing out there, it just doesn't mean that MySQL is garbage or second rate like many people claim, many people who never even have used MySQL or with anything other than MyISAM tables.
All that I want to convey is that we use MySQL for business critical, write intensive data and have never experienced any problems what so ever, which is quite contrary to the "oh no you're doomed if you use MySQL" crowd.
Now I have not tested 9.2, but when we developed the application and also during QA we run it against all our supported sql servers and MySQL always have better insert/update performance (we are not select intense) then either MSSQL or PostgreSQL (which can be a too old version to be a reliable source since we use the version bundled with CentOS). But we have not performed any tuning what so ever of course since the purpose is to QA the application and not the dba.
That is left for out end customers to do, we simply supply the application that feeds a (any) sql server with our datafeed aswelll as the data feed, which sql to use and how to tune it is up to them. However we use MySQL internally which is not tuned at all (we are not DB savvy) but they perform very well and we have never had any problems with them, and they do receive our full data flow. Our customers with MSSQL servers however experiences lots of problems and they receive only a subset of the dataflow, I have never heard any problem with PostgreSQL but the one customer that we have that I know runs Postgres has a very competent DBA so I think he knows how to keep that one nice and tuned.
So my experience is that PostgreSQL might be a nice server, MySQL is definitely a good server and most things that are written about it is either FUD or from very old versions, and the one I would never ever touch with a ten foot pole is MSSQL.
Ok, so which of his predictions has gone wrong then?
It's not SD to HD the source was HD to begin with, the change is 4fps to 60fps.
Why should we listen to the rioters and believe what they say? Do you also think that we should change the legal system so that the prosecution will be silent and we should only hear the defendendts own story on why he commited the crime?
One also has to understand that many of these riots have happened in countries that are or just recently have been dictaturships for many many years. So in their reasoning no one in the US could have done this without the blessing and explicit order by the US gouvernment, and the US gouvernment would do it only as a hostile move against the muslim countries. Because that is how it worked/works in their countries. It will take many years for Libyans and Egyptions to think in democratic terms.
>Did you know that MySQL re-compiles every stored procedure in a database on every new connection?
Actually it really doesn't, it will only recompile the stored procedure if the compiled version has left the cache, so as long as they fit into the cache you would see very little compiling going on.
Very nice of the PostgreSQL developer there to run MySQL in a non strict mode and then play confused when it does exactly what he tells it to do... Perhaps it's unknown to many people, but with MySQL you can configure the database engine for different levels of SQL correctness, the default is usually to be very lenient since that is what the normal PHP user would expect (and people used to the older MyISAM storage engine). But for those who want correct SQL correctness like PostgreSQL it is possible to configure it that way.
Exactly why does it matter that MySQL got ACID first with the inclusion of InnoDB? It would only matter if you pretend that MySQL version 1.0 is the only version that you can run or something... :-), whell it might be that PostgreSQL is better performant etc. It just happens that for my use case it doesn't, we provide stock market data to sql-servers among other things and the only users we have that never experience performance problems or stability problems are out MySQL user base (the ones with the most problems run MSSQL).
And yeah comparisons on the Internet is of course always true
If you read the bug that you linked to you'll see that it was a regression that wasn't catched by the original test, i.e it was probably not a regression after all, simply that the first fix wasn't a fix for all possible cases. And it's not like there has never been any bugs or regression bugs in other dbs...
Yes seriously. We use MySQL extensively with Terabyte sizes databases with tens of thousands writes per second and have never experienced any performance or stability problems what so ever. Our customers who use MSSQL however experiences lots of troubles.
Why is MySQL _obviously_ not up to par? Yes I'm really curios.
Of course it had to be the pills, no chance in hell that your daughter simply got older and stopped having ear infections like many other children...
You are 100% correct, thanks to the old monopoly back in the days Microsoft can now reap the benefits for a very long time (and then one has to consider that the monopoly is still here in practice since all new computers are sold with OS included).
Why on earth are you running gentoo if you want a stable dev environment?
>Lets be honest and cut the bullshit folks...why does Windows rule the desktop? its simply because there is software that covers every niche from inventory management to medical billing, electrical supply to salvage yards, there is SOMEBODY out there making software for it and it runs on Windows.
Yes but it''s not like that because Windows was better in any way, it's only because Windows was and still is the only choice out there for people buying computers. Microsoft reaps the benefits of their old monopoly, once all the software houses wrote software for Windows they no longer needed the monopoly to maintin the #1 position because playing catch up is impossible.