From: | "Tony Lausin" <tonylausin(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "David Goodenough" <david(dot)goodenough(at)btconnect(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS? |
Date: | 2006-04-30 19:14:26 |
Message-ID: | 296cdcaf0604301214t17c4bb49x20f9a6c25d740b8d@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Very odd. I had always heard that MySql (at least originally) was a
> "quick and dirty" database, easy to use, not fully standards compliant,
> and not enterprise grade. Postgresql on the other hand was always
> the heavyweight, standards compliant, enterprise db, which was more
> difficult to use and set up but much more resilient. Postgresql has been
> getting more UI support (often seen as a user friendly bonus) and
> things like autovacuum support so that it is easier to use out of the box,
> and MySql has been gaining standards compliance and resilience.
>
> Funny how perceptions can differ.
Hi David,
I think it's very odd too, cause that's the exact same perception of
MySQL I have. My experience with MySQL is really limited to my
Wordpress blog, and that means I've never actually designed a database
with it. I wonder how much of this is just marketing and hype - either
on the side of MySQL or the side of Oracle.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tony Lausin | 2006-04-30 19:23:31 | Re: Is PostgreSQL an easy choice for a large CMS? |
Previous Message | Jim Fitzgerald | 2006-04-30 18:32:01 | How would I write this query... |