| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |
| Date: | 2003-11-11 17:26:27 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0311111025290.29178-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > I'm confused. This is exactly an example of what I was suggesting that we
> > don't want to do. Did you offer it in that sense, or some other way?
>
> I actually have always thought that the MySQL gotchas page was objective
> and well-researched. It's not an "argument" as such, just facts.
>
> Chris
>
Agreed, Postgresql could use one as well. It's gotchas would run into
the realm of forgotten vacuums, analyzes, foreign key deadlocks, et. al.
Every database has warts, it's knowing where they are and how to avoid
them that helps.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-11-11 17:31:47 | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-11-11 17:23:12 | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |