On Sat, 2002-06-15 at 15:16, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> That's not exactly true, according to
> <http://www.urbanlegends.com/products/beta_vs_vhs.html>. But it _is_
> an instructive analogy.
Beta went on of course to become a professional format.
> There are a couple of things about MySQL that give it an advantage.
> First, it is widely believed to be fast. Second, it is good enough
> for many types of application. Third, it has "mind share".
<snip>
Speed at the web application level must surely depend on what
application layer you are using between the web server and the database?
Maybe people say that because PHP is optimized for MySQL?
> The second belief is certainly true, with the load issues taken into
> consideration. Maybe what that means is that PostgreSQL plays MS SQL
> Server to MySQL's Access (ooh, I'll get flamed for that one).
Access isn't a database so MySQL isn't either? =:-D
<snip>
> RDBMSs are like VCRs in that it is better to use a system a lot of
> others use, because then you can get stuff (like DBAs) easily. It is
> a major PITA to hire a PostgreSQL DBA these days. Everyone and his
> brother knows about MySQL (well, or claims he does!), but competent
> PostgreSQL people are thin on the ground. And that's a real cost for
> a company considering using PostgreSQL.
In the web application field hosting is just as big a PITA.
Cheers
Tony
--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html