From: | Chris <dmagick(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | stelar(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Oracle purchases Sleepycat - is this the "other shoe" |
Date: | 2006-02-16 02:49:49 |
Message-ID: | 43F3E84D.1030703@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> And since MySQL already has got the upperhand in terms of marketing, Oracle
> would buy MySQL to make it as the low-end alternative. Never mind the
> lack/immature features in MySQL such as stored proc or trigger.
Mysql 5 has stored procedures and triggers.
The fact that you have to change between different "storage engines" to
use transactions properly etc is a little weird (and some of the new
engines are just bizarre), but that's beside the point.
90% of open-source software is written to use only mysql (and it's not
easy to switch to another db) - search freshmeat or sourceforge for
anything postgresql related.. not much there.
Then, even if you do write something to use postgresql a lot of hosts
don't support it anyway ('mysql is good enough').. so you're stuck.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Uwe C. Schroeder | 2006-02-16 02:56:37 | Re: Oracle purchases Sleepycat - is this the "other shoe" |
Previous Message | Leonard Soetedjo | 2006-02-16 02:39:08 | Re: Oracle purchases Sleepycat - is this the "other shoe" |