If any so-called webmaster working for *me* tried to implement a MySQL-based solution, I'd ship his ass to the Israeli-Palestian front lines so god damn fast it'd make his head spin!
That's because you apparently have never managed a high-volume website which relies on dynamic content.
I work for an internet retailer with over 150 websites, all of which connect to an Oracle database to serve dynamic content (except for some nify product data caching stuff I came up with. I'm so cool.;). Before we switched to Oracle, we used MySQL. The switch was mandated because management hired a 'DBA' expert whose only previous experience was with Oracle, and since he was being paid more than any of the other developers, obviously he knew more than we did. The problem with BOTH DBMSes wasn't with the DBs themselves, it was with hardware: most sites on the web, including some of the most popular ones, are not run on $1m Sun Fire servers, or even on $75000 Sun Enterprise servers, they're run on off-the-shelf, Intel-based, cheap rackmount machines with little RAM, and 2 or fewer CPUs. These machines are simply not capable of handling the amount of traffic in a/.'ing. So maybe if you want to donate a Compaq AlphaServer or a Sun Enterprise machine to KDE, don't bitch about their choice of DBMS, since their DMBS isn't the problem, their hardware is.
I manage a few dozen linux boxen here, and their names use a common reference frame, with individual idioms for different applications.
i.e. database servers are planets/moons (Dagobah, Death Star), web servers are people (Anakin, Obi-wan, etc.)
Basically, just use a common reference frame that's easily remembered. Trademark infringment is optional.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
If any so-called webmaster working for *me* tried to implement a MySQL-based solution, I'd ship his ass to the Israeli-Palestian front lines so god damn fast it'd make his head spin!
;). Before we switched to Oracle, we used MySQL. The switch was mandated because management hired a 'DBA' expert whose only previous experience was with Oracle, and since he was being paid more than any of the other developers, obviously he knew more than we did. The problem with BOTH DBMSes wasn't with the DBs themselves, it was with hardware: most sites on the web, including some of the most popular ones, are not run on $1m Sun Fire servers, or even on $75000 Sun Enterprise servers, they're run on off-the-shelf, Intel-based, cheap rackmount machines with little RAM, and 2 or fewer CPUs. These machines are simply not capable of handling the amount of traffic in a /.'ing. So maybe if you want to donate a Compaq AlphaServer or a Sun Enterprise machine to KDE, don't bitch about their choice of DBMS, since their DMBS isn't the problem, their hardware is.
That's because you apparently have never managed a high-volume website which relies on dynamic content.
I work for an internet retailer with over 150 websites, all of which connect to an Oracle database to serve dynamic content (except for some nify product data caching stuff I came up with. I'm so cool.
I manage a few dozen linux boxen here, and their names use a common reference frame, with individual idioms for different applications. i.e. database servers are planets/moons (Dagobah, Death Star), web servers are people (Anakin, Obi-wan, etc.) Basically, just use a common reference frame that's easily remembered. Trademark infringment is optional. :-)