|
|
 | | From: | Merlin Moncure | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | Thu, 6 Jan 2005 08:45:44 -0500 |
|
|
 | > Has anyone spent any time with the MySQL 5.0 alpha, set to go into
beta
> shortly
(http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/04/HNmysql5beta_1.html)?
>
> Would be interesting to have a rudimentary comparison checklist - not
so
> much benchmarks, as features, as they seem to have added a lot. And
any
> info on how they've implemented these features (e.g. multiple table
types
> in order to use different features, etc.) would be of interest.
>
> Cheers,
> Ned
Putting my advocacy hat on,
If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
the database of choice for industrial application development...
The new stuff on a point by point feature comparison may look
impressive, but they need to work on internal stuff like the locking
engine, get some real logging etc.
On a more even handed note, it's nice to see them get some real
features. Open source success stories are not zero-sum, so what's good
for them is not necessarily bad for us. Competition is good, but pg is
at least 3 years ahead of them in development!
Merlin
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
|
| | From: | Robert Treat | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | 06 Jan 2005 09:40:05 -0500 |
|
|
| Well, I think those of us in the pg community would be interested in
reading it, but IMHO it's a losing proposition for SRA to push articles
that highlight the negativities of other database systems. If you're
going to go down that road you had better tread carefully; personally I
would stick to articles that highlight customer successes.
Robert Treat
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 09:11, Robert Bernier wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I sent an email to Hans-Jürgen Schönig and asked if he
> could give me particulars about the bench marking he did. Could I have some
> comments about the idea of making a more structured presentation in an
> article, in the next SRA newsletter, http://sraapowergres.com ?
>
>
> On January 6, 2005 08:45 am, you wrote:
> > > Has anyone spent any time with the MySQL 5.0 alpha, set to go into
> >
> > beta
> >
> > > shortly
> >
> > (http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/04/HNmysql5beta_1.html)?
> >
> > > Would be interesting to have a rudimentary comparison checklist - not
> >
> > so
> >
> > > much benchmarks, as features, as they seem to have added a lot. And
> >
> > any
> >
> > > info on how they've implemented these features (e.g. multiple table
> >
> > types
> >
> > > in order to use different features, etc.) would be of interest.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ned
> >
> > Putting my advocacy hat on,
> > If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
> > saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
> > don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
> > the database of choice for industrial application development...
> >
> > The new stuff on a point by point feature comparison may look
> > impressive, but they need to work on internal stuff like the locking
> > engine, get some real logging etc.
> >
> > On a more even handed note, it's nice to see them get some real
> > features. Open source success stories are not zero-sum, so what's good
> > for them is not necessarily bad for us. Competition is good, but pg is
> > at least 3 years ahead of them in development!
> >
> > Merlin
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
|
| | From: | Robert Bernier | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:52:31 -0500 |
|
|
| Good point, but hard, solid, dependable information that is well presented is
something you can't just ignore. I would like to go down this road a little
farther and then look at the final product before deciding to publish or not.
On January 6, 2005 09:40 am, Robert Treat wrote:
> Well, I think those of us in the pg community would be interested in
> reading it, but IMHO it's a losing proposition for SRA to push articles
> that highlight the negativities of other database systems. If you're
> going to go down that road you had better tread carefully; personally I
> would stick to articles that highlight customer successes.
>
> Robert Treat
>
> On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 09:11, Robert Bernier wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > I sent an email to Hans-Jürgen Schönig and asked
> > if he could give me particulars about the bench marking he did. Could I
> > have some comments about the idea of making a more structured
> > presentation in an article, in the next SRA newsletter,
> > http://sraapowergres.com ?
> >
> > On January 6, 2005 08:45 am, you wrote:
> > > > Has anyone spent any time with the MySQL 5.0 alpha, set to go into
> > >
> > > beta
> > >
> > > > shortly
> > >
> > > (http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/04/HNmysql5beta_1.html)?
> > >
> > > > Would be interesting to have a rudimentary comparison checklist - not
> > >
> > > so
> > >
> > > > much benchmarks, as features, as they seem to have added a lot. And
> > >
> > > any
> > >
> > > > info on how they've implemented these features (e.g. multiple table
> > >
> > > types
> > >
> > > > in order to use different features, etc.) would be of interest.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Ned
> > >
> > > Putting my advocacy hat on,
> > > If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
> > > saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
> > > don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
> > > the database of choice for industrial application development...
> > >
> > > The new stuff on a point by point feature comparison may look
> > > impressive, but they need to work on internal stuff like the locking
> > > engine, get some real logging etc.
> > >
> > > On a more even handed note, it's nice to see them get some real
> > > features. Open source success stories are not zero-sum, so what's good
> > > for them is not necessarily bad for us. Competition is good, but pg is
> > > at least 3 years ahead of them in development!
> > >
> > > Merlin
> > >
> > > ---------------------------(end of
> > > broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists
> > > at once with the unregister command (send "unregister
> > > YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
|
|
| | From: | Ned Lilly | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | Thu, 06 Jan 2005 09:17:41 -0500 |
|
|
| Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Putting my advocacy hat on,
> If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
> saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
> don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
> the database of choice for industrial application development...
That reminds me of another, related question ... can anyone comment on the relationship between MySQL 5 and MaxDB (formerly SAP DB)? The talk at one point was that the end result of that alliance would be a total rewrite of MySQL to incorporate concepts from MaxDB, and that the new product would somehow be backward compatible with both predecessors.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
|
|
| | From: | Robert Treat | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | 06 Jan 2005 15:55:57 -0500 |
|
|
| On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 11:53, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Ned,
>
> > That reminds me of another, related question ... can anyone comment on the
> > relationship between MySQL 5 and MaxDB (formerly SAP DB)? The talk at one
> > point was that the end result of that alliance would be a total rewrite of
> > MySQL to incorporate concepts from MaxDB, and that the new product would
> > somehow be backward compatible with both predecessors.
>
> That was the idea, yes. Personally, I don't think it's possible; that's
> probably the reason why MySQL 5.0 is two years late. I think eventually
> MySQL AB will have to come to terms with the idea that they have two seperate
> products, MySQL and MaxDB, and the two can't be made compatible.
>
I think the last theory I had heard was that they were going to make a
maxdb table type for my$ql that would be compatible with maxdb. This
much could work on it's surface (like so many things with my$ql, think
using transactions with myisam which doesnt work but doesnt toss errors)
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
|
|
| | From: | Robert Bernier | | Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison | | Date: | Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:11:06 -0500 |
|
|
| Guys,
I sent an email to Hans-Jürgen Schönig and asked if he
could give me particulars about the bench marking he did. Could I have some
comments about the idea of making a more structured presentation in an
article, in the next SRA newsletter, http://sraapowergres.com ?
On January 6, 2005 08:45 am, you wrote:
> > Has anyone spent any time with the MySQL 5.0 alpha, set to go into
>
> beta
>
> > shortly
>
> (http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/01/04/HNmysql5beta_1.html)?
>
> > Would be interesting to have a rudimentary comparison checklist - not
>
> so
>
> > much benchmarks, as features, as they seem to have added a lot. And
>
> any
>
> > info on how they've implemented these features (e.g. multiple table
>
> types
>
> > in order to use different features, etc.) would be of interest.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ned
>
> Putting my advocacy hat on,
> If you look at their description of the upcoming features, it's
> saturated with words like 'basic', 'initial', and 'rudimentary'. I
> don't think mysql 5.0 will be a watershed moment where it will become
> the database of choice for industrial application development...
>
> The new stuff on a point by point feature comparison may look
> impressive, but they need to work on internal stuff like the locking
> engine, get some real logging etc.
>
> On a more even handed note, it's nice to see them get some real
> features. Open source success stories are not zero-sum, so what's good
> for them is not necessarily bad for us. Competition is good, but pg is
> at least 3 years ahead of them in development!
>
> Merlin
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
|
|
|
