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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, John DeSoi <desoi(at)pgedit(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date: 2006-05-18 20:36:31
Message-ID: 20663.1147984591@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Mark Woodward wrote:
>> Again, there is so much code for MySQL, a MySQL emulation layer, MEL for
>> short, could allow plug and play compatibility for open source, and closed
>> source, applications that otherwise would force a PostgreSQL user to hold
>> his or her nose and use MySQL.
>>
> If we had infinite resources this might make sense. We don't, so it
> doesn't. There is a real cost to producing a compatibility layer, and
> the cost will be those spiffy new features.

The real problem is that there's a whole lot of stuff, such as mysql's
weak error checking, that I don't think a "compatibility layer" could
sanely provide.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message elein 2006-05-18 20:46:23 Re: Toward A Positive Marketing Approach.
Previous Message Michael Dean 2006-05-18 20:32:51 Toward A Positive Marketing Approach.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message elein 2006-05-18 20:46:23 Re: Toward A Positive Marketing Approach.
Previous Message Michael Dean 2006-05-18 20:32:51 Toward A Positive Marketing Approach.