Re: [GENERAL] interesting PHP/MySQL thread

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: Erik Price <eprice(at)ptc(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "Advocacy (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] interesting PHP/MySQL thread
Date: 2003-06-24 01:00:10
Message-ID: 3EF7A29A.90101@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-docs pgsql-general

Erik Price wrote:
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> I'd be happy if PHP would adopt a database-neutral stance, ie, nothing
>> in particular bundled into their core distribution. That might not be
>> compatible with their project goals though. Anyone have a feeling about
>> how important it is to them to have bundled DB support? Maybe we could
>> talk them into bundling more than one DB interface --- if they put both
>> PG and SQlite support into their distro, that'd be fine with me too.
>
> On that note, last I read, MySQL is planning to offer PHP as a language
> for writing stored procedures when the features is made available in the
> 5.0 release.

On that note, last I read, MySQL is planning to develop a completely new
enterprise level database system that will be named MySQL again (for
confusions sake) and include code from what's known so far as SAPDB.

My question is, will MySQL 5.0 be based on MySQL 4.x and include code
taken from SAPDB, will it be based on SAPDB with code snippets the other
way around or will it be started from scratch and include one or the
other piece from both?

And, if MySQL 5.0 *might* not be based on MySQL 4.x, what happens to
that codebase? Will the current MySQL core development team continue to
add all the promised features to the old product line, or will the
existing users have to migrate to a completely different MySQL system
anyway?

Note that we have seen that sort of "redo from scratch" before.
Microsoft SQL Server is a really reliable database system after they got
rid of the old crap, so it's not a bad decision per se. And if you don't
play Crimson Skies on your database server, the Win2K + SQLServer combo
makes a pretty decent production system. It's just that Microsoft had
the "paying" user base that justifies to write useful conversion tools
and that the old code base wasn't "that" extreme about violating
standards. The future MySQL is supposed to support SAP's application
platform, so it has to fail crash-me in order to be a little bit more
spec compliant.

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2003-06-24 01:15:48 Re: MySQL/PG search times
Previous Message Chris Smith 2003-06-23 23:20:23 Re: [GENERAL] interesting PHP/MySQL thread

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2003-06-24 01:15:48 Re: MySQL/PG search times
Previous Message Chris Smith 2003-06-23 23:20:23 Re: [GENERAL] interesting PHP/MySQL thread

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-24 01:08:33 Re: RE : full featured alter table?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-23 23:49:26 Re: [HACKERS] ss_family in hba.c