Re: Why Not MySQL?

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Malcontent null <malcontent(at)msgto(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why Not MySQL?
Date: 2000-05-03 10:58:40
Message-ID: 39100660.20FBBDF2@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Malcontent null wrote:
>
> >Anyway, so the larger class of problem is for the Sybase/M$ user who
> >relies on case insensitive queries (which *are* available in Postgres)

Maybe the right place to introduce case-insensitiveness would be in ODBC
driver then ?

> If I may.
> MS Access for all of it's damnable faults is the single most popular
> database in the world. There are a whole slew of people who do nothing
> except access programming and make very good money at it. Postgres is
> a great candidate as a possible back end database engine for access.
> This is a big possible application for postgres. To be usable for this
> purpose however it needs a few things.
> 1) Longer object names (I guess this is possible via a DEFINE)

How long should they be ?

> 2) Case insensitive queries.

Probably only the Access subset ("like", "order by", maybe even "=" ?)

> 3) Outer joins (coming soon!).
> 4) Maybe ADO drivers for the VB users of the world.

AFAIK MS moves fast and ADO will be soon (or is already) officially obsolete.

The technology du jour is XML.

> I don't know how important access integration is to the postgres
> community as a whole though.

Probably not a top priority. Oracle is much more often seen as the target.

---------------------
Hannu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Jack Olrik 2000-05-03 11:07:03 plperl is still disabled
Previous Message Anand Raman 2000-05-03 10:53:13 Re: Re: [GENERAL] postgresql7.0 jdbc driver