From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison |
Date: | 2005-01-06 14:40:05 |
Message-ID: | 1105022405.15259.1280.camel@camel |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Well, I think those of us in the pg community would be interested in
reading it, but IMHO it's a losing proposition for SRA to push articles
that highlight the negativities of other database systems. If you're
going to go down that road you had better tread carefully; personally I
would stick to articles that highlight customer successes.
Robert Treat
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 09:11, Robert Bernier wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I sent an email to Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> and asked if he
> could give me particulars about the bench marking he did. Could I have some
> comments about the idea of making a more structured presentation in an
> article, in the next SRA newsletter, http://sraapowergres.com ?
>
>
> On January 6, 2005 08:45 am, you wrote:
> > > Has anyone spent any time with the MySQL 5.0 alpha, set to go into
> >
> > beta
> >
> > > shortly
> >
> > (http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/04/HNmysql5beta_1.html)?
> >
> > > Would be interesting to have a rudimentary comparison checklist - not
> >
> > so
> >
> > > much benchmarks, as features, as they seem to have added a lot. And
> >
> > any
> >
> > > info on how they've implemented these features (e.g. multiple table
> >
> > types
> >
> > > in order to use different features, etc.) would be of interest.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ned
> >
> > Putting my advocacy hat on,
> > If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
> > saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
> > don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
> > the database of choice for industrial application development...
> >
> > The new stuff on a point by point feature comparison may look
> > impressive, but they need to work on internal stuff like the locking
> > engine, get some real logging etc.
> >
> > On a more even handed note, it's nice to see them get some real
> > features. Open source success stories are not zero-sum, so what's good
> > for them is not necessarily bad for us. Competition is good, but pg is
> > at least 3 years ahead of them in development!
> >
> > Merlin
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Treat | 2005-01-06 14:42:15 | Re: MySQL 5 comparison |
Previous Message | Ned Lilly | 2005-01-06 14:17:41 | Re: MySQL 5 comparison |