Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: John DeSoi <desoi(at)pgedit(dot)com>
Cc: Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date: 2006-05-18 16:24:21
Message-ID: 20060518162421.GK64371@pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:35:34PM -0400, John DeSoi wrote:
>
> On May 17, 2006, at 8:08 PM, Mark Woodward wrote:
>
> >What is the best way to go about creating a "plug and play,"
> >PostgreSQL
> >replacement for MySQL? I think the biggest problem getting PostgreSQL
> >accepted is that so much code is available for MySQL.
>
>
> http://pgfoundry.org/projects/mysqlcompat/

Even better would be coming up with a compatability mode, a la what
EnterpriseDB has done for Oracle.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2006-05-18 16:38:51 Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2006-05-18 15:43:29 Re: at JavaOne ... is anyone else?

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2006-05-18 16:25:45 Re: [HACKERS] buildfarm failures
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-05-18 16:22:46 Re: Compression and on-disk sorting