Setting up user authentication and granting rights is more complicated in Pg. The last time I did it, I had to dig through the RPM for instructions on how it was set up, since the on-line docs can't be sure which way it was done on your local machine. MySQL's user auth system is much less flexible, but also very easy to get going.
The InnoDB engine handles transactions across multiple tables with no trouble. The real speed advantage though is for simple selects, like the ones that make up most of the work in web applications. Enterprise features include distributed transactions, replication, data archiving, etc.
Yes, I've used Pg. The setup is just not as simple. It's powerful and flexible, which is great, but not for everyone.
MySQL is clearly faster at simple selects, which is what most web apps do most of the time. Maybe it's because of the result cache, or the ability to use simpler table types when you choose to, but whatever it is, it's faster. I'm not saying Pg is slow, just that MySQL has really impressive speed.
If you haven't been keeping up with MySQL, why are you responding at all? It has stored procedures and triggers. It doesn't have custom-types, and personally I'm glad that it doesn't after my experiences with those.
Enterprise features? Distributed transactions, replication. Choice of table-types is a nice feature that lets you trade transactions and constraints for speed on a read-only reporting database.
I'm not against PostgreSQL -- it's a great database. It just doesn't actually have everything MySQL does.
What's keeping MySQL afloat? Hmmm... Incredible speed? Easy setup and administration? Handy SQL extensions? Enterprise features for those who want them and not for those who don't? These things matter, and PostgreSQL, for all that it is an impressive database, does not have them.
I was home sick from school that day, and watched it on network TV. I remember the commentators trying to figure out what happened and being totally at a loss for words.
Apache HTTPD does not come with PHP. PHP is not an Apache project. Tomcat (a Java servlet runner) is an Apache project, although it isn't shipped with the httpd either.
Well, given those hardware specs, I would expect apache to be able to serve about 800 or so static pages per second. Your bottleneck is your bandwidth, so your choice of webserver is pretty much irrelevant here.
If you use InnoDB tables with MySQL, it doesn't have the locking issues you refer to. It uses the same MVCC locking approach that PostgreSQL and Oracle use.
That seems awfully nitpicky compared to supporting transactions and referential integrity constraints, but MySQL 5 supports the sort of strict date checking you're asking for as well.
Fails to live up to ACID? MySQL has had ACID transactions for years now. If you didn't know this, you have no place commenting on MySQL at all. It has the same sort of MVCC transaction and locking support that PostgreSQL does, and has since version 3.23.
Did anyone bother to check the source here? Newsfactor consistently prints the worst, most factually incorrect tech site out there. They make Slashdot look positive responsible.
If you take a look at actual job listings, you'll see that there is still significantly more use of Perl than PHP. Many ISPs support PHP, and many small hosted sites use it, but that doesn't make it more mainstream. And the idea that C++ is more mainstream than Java... Where have you been hiding for the last 6 years?
Amazon chose Perl pretty recently, so I'd say you're wrong about that. I don't see the other major companies that use Perl extensively like Ticket Master, CitySearch, Overture, and Yahoo complaining about it either.
Maybe you've heard of Ticketmaster.com? CitySearch.com?
not just for legacy code
on
Perl Medic
·
· Score: 5, Informative
This is the best book I've ever read about how to write clear and maintainable Perl code. The advice is solid and up-to-date with discussions of perltidy, modern web techniques, etc. I would recommend this book to anyone who writes Perl, just as a style guide.
Slashdot Mirror
Setting up user authentication and granting rights is more complicated in Pg. The last time I did it, I had to dig through the RPM for instructions on how it was set up, since the on-line docs can't be sure which way it was done on your local machine. MySQL's user auth system is much less flexible, but also very easy to get going.
So did I. MySQL has stored procedures and triggers in the same SQL:2003 syntax that DB2 uses.
The InnoDB engine handles transactions across multiple tables with no trouble. The real speed advantage though is for simple selects, like the ones that make up most of the work in web applications. Enterprise features include distributed transactions, replication, data archiving, etc.
Distributed transactions? Replication? Most people don't need these features, or stored procs or views for that matter.
Yes, I've used Pg. The setup is just not as simple. It's powerful and flexible, which is great, but not for everyone.
MySQL is clearly faster at simple selects, which is what most web apps do most of the time. Maybe it's because of the result cache, or the ability to use simpler table types when you choose to, but whatever it is, it's faster. I'm not saying Pg is slow, just that MySQL has really impressive speed.
If you haven't been keeping up with MySQL, why are you responding at all? It has stored procedures and triggers. It doesn't have custom-types, and personally I'm glad that it doesn't after my experiences with those.
Enterprise features? Distributed transactions, replication. Choice of table-types is a nice feature that lets you trade transactions and constraints for speed on a read-only reporting database.
I'm not against PostgreSQL -- it's a great database. It just doesn't actually have everything MySQL does.
What's keeping MySQL afloat? Hmmm... Incredible speed? Easy setup and administration? Handy SQL extensions? Enterprise features for those who want them and not for those who don't? These things matter, and PostgreSQL, for all that it is an impressive database, does not have them.
I was home sick from school that day, and watched it on network TV. I remember the commentators trying to figure out what happened and being totally at a loss for words.
Apache HTTPD does not come with PHP. PHP is not an Apache project. Tomcat (a Java servlet runner) is an Apache project, although it isn't shipped with the httpd either.
They made this decision quite recently. Anyway, you clearly have already made up your mind and have no interest in actually talking about it.
IMDB was one of the first big sites to use mod_perl. Congrats, IMDB! Glad to see you still going strong.
Apparently Amazon thinks so. They started using Perl for their new web development a couple of years ago.
Well, given those hardware specs, I would expect apache to be able to serve about 800 or so static pages per second. Your bottleneck is your bandwidth, so your choice of webserver is pretty much irrelevant here.
If you use InnoDB tables with MySQL, it doesn't have the locking issues you refer to. It uses the same MVCC locking approach that PostgreSQL and Oracle use.
SQLite is not as fast as MySQL for anything I've tried it on, especially simple read/write access. The test you're linking to is ancient.
Since simple web databases (e.g. the one storing your comments) don't actually need them.
That seems awfully nitpicky compared to supporting transactions and referential integrity constraints, but MySQL 5 supports the sort of strict date checking you're asking for as well.
Fails to live up to ACID? MySQL has had ACID transactions for years now. If you didn't know this, you have no place commenting on MySQL at all. It has the same sort of MVCC transaction and locking support that PostgreSQL does, and has since version 3.23.
Did anyone bother to check the source here? Newsfactor consistently prints the worst, most factually incorrect tech site out there. They make Slashdot look positive responsible.
If you take a look at actual job listings, you'll see that there is still significantly more use of Perl than PHP. Many ISPs support PHP, and many small hosted sites use it, but that doesn't make it more mainstream. And the idea that C++ is more mainstream than Java... Where have you been hiding for the last 6 years?
Amazon chose Perl pretty recently, so I'd say you're wrong about that. I don't see the other major companies that use Perl extensively like Ticket Master, CitySearch, Overture, and Yahoo complaining about it either.
Maybe you've heard of Ticketmaster.com? CitySearch.com?
This is the best book I've ever read about how to write clear and maintainable Perl code. The advice is solid and up-to-date with discussions of perltidy, modern web techniques, etc. I would recommend this book to anyone who writes Perl, just as a style guide.
I'm not seeing it. What would you have preferred to have him say in response there?
If you read the rest of the comments you'll see that it is already being used for applications larger than most people every work on.