| From: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
|---|---|
| To: | Marques Johansson <marques(at)displague(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL vs. MySQL vs. Oracle, 2005 report card |
| Date: | 2005-02-14 14:06:44 |
| Message-ID: | 200502141936.44244.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Friday 11 Feb 2005 6:07 pm, Marques Johansson wrote:
> A recent Slashdot thread on MySQL performance
> (http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/11/038232&from=rss)
> contains a comment mentioning the following Fermilab report from May 2003:
>
> http://www-css.fnal.gov/dsg/external/freeware/mysql-vs-pgsql.html
>
> With the release of PostgreSQL 8.0, how does PostgreSQL currently stand?
That seems to be fairly old and hence out-of-sync. Things have move a lot
since, for all the products involved.
But still I find it rather harsh on postgresql. 8K row limit is long gone and
postgresql does support online backup, to mention a few.
PostgreSQL now has native windows port, tablespaces and many many replication
solutions, not to mention a list of companies that offer PostgreSQL support.
Shridhar
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2005-02-14 14:14:36 | Re: regular expression |
| Previous Message | Vittorio De Martino | 2005-02-14 13:17:14 | Re: pg_dump warnings |