Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres

From: "Peter Galbavy" <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowledge(dot)com>
To: "Tim Perdue" <tperdue(at)valinux(dot)com>, "Benjamin Adida" <ben(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres
Date: 2000-07-05 15:55:13
Message-ID: 04b701bfe699$6fb7e250$81010a0a@flagtelecom.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Yes I'm sure that PHP was designed to make Postgres look bad. All
> benchmarks are designed to make postgres look bad. All web designers
> build everything in just that special way that makes postgres look bad,
> and they all do it because they're inept and stupid, unlike the small
> crowd of postgres users.

I don't believe that your sarcasm is unwarranted, BUT, and this is a big but
(just like mine :), I have found that the popularity of free software is
sometimes iversly proportional to it's complexity. Complexity in turn
sometimes, but not always, implies that the software has more features and
is better thought out. There are exceptions to this, but it has proven true
for many of the packages I have worked with.

MySQL is used by Linux folks (generalising), probably because the learning
curve is not too steep. And the otherway round for other DB + OS
combinations.

The problem I think that many folk have with printed benchmarks is the
apples to oranges comparisons. To make the comparison look valid, you have
to either reduce or ignore the differences of the fruit and just look at a
limited set of values. In the case of the apples and oranges, "average
diameter" may be valid, while "green-ness" is not. The eater of the fruit
actually wanted to know "which tastes better".

Peter

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Benjamin Adida 2000-07-05 15:56:45 Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres
Previous Message Tim Perdue 2000-07-05 15:37:58 Re: Article on MySQL vs. Postgres