Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?
Date: 2002-07-30 11:00:13
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.44.0207301956570.436-100000@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 30 Jul 2002, Hannu Krosing wrote:

> On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 14:51, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian:
> > > It causes too much complexity in other parts of the system.
> >
> > That's one reason.
>
> Seems like somewhat valid reason. But still not enough to do a lot of
> work _and_ annoy a lot of existing users :)

It's almost unquestionably more work to maintain than to drop. Dropping
support for it is a one-time operation. Maintaining it is an ongoing
expense.

> That's quite bogus imho. You could just as well argue that there is
> nothing that relational model handles that can't be done in pure C.

That's a straw man argument. What we (or I, anyway) are arguing is that
the relational model does everything that table inheritance does, and at
least as easily. Extending the model adds complexity without adding the
ability to do things you couldn't easily do before. (This, IMHO, makes
table inheritance quite inelegant.)

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Curt Sampson 2002-07-30 11:02:44 Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?
Previous Message Luis Alberto Amigo Navarro 2002-07-30 10:17:52 Re: Question about LWLockAcquire's use of semaphores instead