Re: PostgreSQL in mission-critical system

Doug Fields sez:
} At 06:17 AM 7/13/2002, Curt Sampson wrote:
} >You should probably go with whatever database you (or your DBA)
} >know best. If you don't know any, PostgreSQL is as good as any.
}
} Actually, I'd say, if you don't know any, PostgreSQL is much better than
} most.

I would agree with that, but...

} I've installed (or tried to install) these databases on Linux:
}
} MySQL
} PostgreSQL
} DB2
} Oracle 8i
}
} I completely failed to get DB2 or Oracle up and running - the system
} requirements, disk partitions, etc., required are nearly incomprehensible
} and they don't give you any human-comprehensible documentation.

...I would disagree with that statement. I haven't tried Oracle, but DB2
7.1 was a pleasure to run on Linux, and only a little hard to install
because it comes as an rpm and I was using a Debian system. It was slightly
harder to deal with on Solaris, but that had more to do with installing it
on a single system in a large cluster with NIS and NFS running rather than
installing it on a standalone server. The documentation was, in general,
clear and once I set up a directory with reasonably named symlinks to the
PDF files on the CD (which followed the 8.3 naming scheme), it was easy to
learn what I needed to know.

The biggest problem I had was that the Java implementation I was using on
Linux had issues (all images and icons, though not widgets and menus, were
missing their red component) with displaying on X on one of the video cards
on the Sun I was using as my workstation.

} MySQL has a very complicated user/table/permissions system, but very few
} tuning parameters, so it is very easy to set up. (All its other drawbacks
} relative to PostgreSQL have already been discussed.)

I installed MySQL on my MacOS X box with ease, got it running, and rejected
it based on its lack of support for views, stored procedures, and foreign
key constraints within a week.

} PostgreSQL is relatively easy to set up (the hardest part is setting it up
} for multiple users and remote access - but that takes only a little while
} of reading the pg_hba.conf and the createuser command), but probably harder
} to tune well.

The only hardship PostgreSQL gave me was that the documentation for
external functions failed to cover MacOS X, therefore I spent a ridiculous
amount of time figuring out which flags to give the linker to produce a
library the postmaster could load.

} So, as Curt says, if you've never run any database on Linux - do yourself a
} favor and use PostgreSQL if you have any but the most simple requirements
} (for which MySQL would probably suffice).
}
} Also - PostgreSQL on Debian/Woody is super-simple to use:
}
} $ apt-get install postgresql postgresql-dev postgresql-clients
} postgresql-doc
} $ createdb mytest
} $ psql mytest

I'd be careful about recommending this. Debian is notoriously behind in
versions in their stable tree. (Hrm, actually, is Woody the unstable tree?
If so, it's worth being clear, and even redundant, about that.)
The package in the stable tree is version 6.5.3. The unstable tree has
7.2.1, which is much better.

} and you're off and running.
} Cheers,
} Doug
--Greg