Postgres in Utah
blr at robertsr.us
Tue Nov 17 22:17:41 MST 2009
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Sasha Pachev <sasha at asksasha.com> wrote:
> >* This is not meant to incite a flame war, but I would be curious to
> > hear what Mr Pachev has to say about this.
> Thus Posgres is more academically correct, while
> MySQL will deviated from academic correctness to achieve better
> performance and improve user experience. I suppose for a small
> business academic correctness is not as important as actually getting
> the job done.
> I suppose that's one way to look at it. But it's not the only one. I've
used PosgreSQL for several internal projects at a business, but not because
it was academically correct.
Postgres has for years been much closer to feature parity with Oracle (and
maybe other commercial databases). I've used MySQL a lot for web, and
especially read-heavy applications. But when I already have code that
relies on Oracle features like transactions, triggers, and pl/sql, pg works
where MySQL wouldn't.
MySQL has added some of those features, but not all of them last time I
checked. And I do still have to put a little work into porting pl/sql. But
my point is that I've never chosen postgres over mysql for academic reasons.
I chose it because it provided solutions that MySQL can't.
My biggest postgres database is just over 1 TB, and it does have performance
problems because all our DBA's are Oracle guys and won't touch postgres to
optimize it. I doesn't help that it's running on 32-bit hardware, either.
More information about the PLUG