Re: postgre vs MySQL

On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Thomas Pundt <mlists(at)rp-online(dot)de> wrote:
> On Donnerstag, 13. März 2008, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> | My real complaint with InnoDB is it's a red headed step child. If
> | mysql supported only innodb, it would be a very different database,
> | and probably a bit simpler as well. no need to worry about how you
> | state fk-pk relationships (currently column level references are
> | silently dropped for innodb OR myisam). If there was a run time
> | switch that said "use only innodb and use syntax that's sane" I'd
> | probably be willing to test that out.
>
> To be fair, MySQL-5 has such a switch (kind of):
>
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/faqs-sql-modes.html
>
> You can set the @@sql_mode variable to a value, that MySQL almost behaves
> like standard SQL (I've not tested this by myself, though).

Sadly running in ansi mode only fixes about half the problems. The
FK-PK syntax on a column level is still ignored in ansi sql mode, and
a lot of other issues are still there. Admittedly, it does do things
like check ints for sane input values, and refuses to truncate
varchars silently if they're too large. But that's the kind of thing
you really shouldn't have to be turning on in the first place.