Re: Why Not MySQL?

From: Malcontent null <malcontent(at)msgto(dot)com>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why Not MySQL?
Date: 2018-05-03 21:04:53
Message-ID: 26108703.957330293063.JavaMail.root@mua1.msgto.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> wrote:

>existing M$ Access app. So far, we were too polite to ask why one is
>working so hard to maintain compatibility with a non-standard
>interface, rather than writing the app to be portable. But I'll ask
>now. Tim?

Fair enough question. I agree with you that this is non standard typical MS lock in crap. But I have an application that is written in access and has outgrown the data engine in access (which is pretty pathetic). Unfortunately this application is very large with over 300 tables and over 1400 saved queries (views). The MS solution to this problem is to upgrade to MS-SQL server (vendor lock in) which processes the queries in the exact same case insensitive manner. SQL server does not break my application. I on the other hand want to avoid upsizing to SQL server. I could use sybase which also allows for case insensitive collation (no surprise there) but I really-really want to use an upen source database server.
So. So right now I have a few choices.
1) Buckle into the vendor lock and be stuck with NT and SQL server
2) Buy sybase and spend way more then I want to.
3) Completely rewrite all 1400 queries and write all kinds of new code make sure the SQL emitted by access gets intercepted and translated properly.
4) Make Postgres process queries case insensitively.

Well the third one is out of the question really I don't have that kind of time or money. It would take me a the rest of the year to accomplish that goal and the database would have to be taken out of commision in the meantime.

>
>btw, it seems to be the case that problems such as these, which might
>be interesting during slow times (from a theoretical standpoint at
>least), are decidely less so during the final stages of a release
>cycle.

I fully understand that you guys have your own set of priorities. I also appreciate the work you guys have put into making postgres into a database I want to use. Having said all that I did wait 4 to 5 days without a reply of any sort. It would have been perfectly fine for somebody to say "It's not possible don't waste your time", "Don't ask this question here", "we are really entirely too busy to deal with this" or even "go away and don't ever bother us ever again".
----------
Message To Spammers -- Game Over! Get spam-free email at http://www.MsgTo.com

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2018-05-03 21:25:03 MSYS2 and pg_upgrade testing
Previous Message Malcontent null 2018-05-03 20:42:27 Re: Why Not MySQL?