Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?

scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org ("Marc G. Fournier") writes:
> To give someone a running chance at migrating it to PostgreSQL, a
> 'MySQL compatibility module' would allow them to just plug the
> existing DB in, and then work at improving sections of the code over
> time ...
>
> Hell, if done well, the module should be able to dump appropriately
> 'clean' PgSQL schemas ... as in your example elow about the domains ...

You can't have that because you essentially need to throw out four
aspects of fairly vital "data validation" functionality:

1. Dates cease to be validatable.

2. NULL and 0 and '' are all roughly equivalent, even though they
aren't.

3. Foreign key constraints have to be ignored.

4. You have to fabricate a locale offering a case-insensitive sort
order.

I suppose #4 isn't "vital data validation"...

But after you "gut" the PostgreSQL-based system of those four aspects
of data integrity, I'm not sure there's any remaining benefit to
having PostgreSQL in play...
--
"cbbrowne","@","cbbrowne.com"
http://cbbrowne.com/info/unix.html
CBS News report on Fort Worth tornado damage:
"Eight major downtown buildings were severely damaged and 1,000 homes
were damaged, with 95 uninhabitable. Gov. George W. Bush declared
Tarrant County a disaster area. Federal Emergency Management Agency
workers are expected to arrive sometime next week after required
paperwork is completed."