Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)

From: "Craig O'Shannessy" <craig(at)ucw(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>, "Randal L(dot) Schwartz" <merlyn(at)stonehenge(dot)com>, Randolf Richardson <rr(at)8x(dot)ca>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)
Date: 2003-12-01 04:45:27
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.44.0312011541430.14188-100000@mail.ucw.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> There is another thing too-- MySQL manages connection permissions entirely
>
> >within the RDBMS, while PostgreSQL relies on the pg_hba.conf. This makes
> >managing a database server in a shared hosting environment a bit harder.
> >While I appreciate the PostgreSQL way of doing things, I realize that it is
> >a bit harder to make work for the average web hosting provider. I am
> >currently looking at the possibility of building a solution, but no one has
> >expressed interest, so I am not sure.
> >
> >
> >
> Ahh just run different instances for each customer.

This wouldn't really work for a ISP would it? A fairly low spec machine
with a few hundred low-hit websites, maybe 60 of them wanting a database
for their blogs?

My ISP runs mysql, I don't get shell access :((, but I can remotely
connect to their mysql server from home. If running sixty instances of
PostgreSQL, wouldn't you have to have 60 different port numbers, not to
mention a whole lot of RAM?

I've asked them to put up PostgreSQL as an alternative, but they just say
"too hard" and don't want to talk about it.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-12-01 04:52:10 Re: ISO 8601 "Time Intervals" of the "format with time-unit
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2003-12-01 04:39:45 Re: Humor me: Postgresql vs. MySql (esp. licensing)