Re: Is my MySQL Gaining ?

The confusing license terms and conditions was one of the main reasons I
appeared on this list some weeks ago, when I was considering a
commercial venture using a JDBC client application, and couldn't
untangle who needed licenses, how many and what for exactly. After a
breif foray on #postgresql getting some newbie questions answered (like:
can PG do everything that MySQL can) don't laugh, I was new to this
remember. I was informed that PG was the tool for the job. After
having a conversation about Views, Triggers, Stored Procedures, I
decided to find out what these things were and joined this list. Never
looked back......

But...

I was on #php a day or two ago, and mentioned PG to someone who was
looking to solve a problem, he was quite interested, and asked what else
PG could do. So I told him:

Me: It has views.
Him: What are they?

Me: It has Stored Procedures
Him: Are They Good? What Do They Do?

Me: It has Triggers.
Him: Will they help me?

This really rattled some peoples cages and I ended up defending PG
against some really ill thought out attacks. Like:

MySQL User: But can PG deal with really complicated joins.
Me: In many cases the extra functionality of PG avoids the problems
where really complicated joins would be needed in MySQL

MySQL User: But MySQL is fast, PG is not so fast.
Me: With PG you can move much of the functionality INTO the database
using stored procedures, these stored procedures will run faster than
interpreted PHP, therefore taking the load away from the webserver.

MySQL User: But my Apache/MySQL can handle squillions of hits/queries
etc, PG probably couldn't. Do you know any sites that have a lot of
traffic that use PG.
Me: Ummmm... try the .org registry, I'm sure they have a reasonable
traffic load.

MySQL User: What project made you move to PG from MySQL
Me: The confusing licensing conditions when I wanted to write a
commercial app based on MySQL.

This completely killed all traffic on the channel for a minute or two,
while the cogs and gears whirred while people tried to Grock the concept
of OSS MySQL costing money to use in an application.

After this lengthy defence and answering many questions without the
slightest hesitation from me (and I'm new to PG), it made me realise why
I was thinking about a PostgreSQL for MySQL users paper.

Just My 2 Cents

Tony

Chris Travers wrote:

>I would be surprised if people selling proprietary apps would
>choose MySQL over PostgreSQL.
>
>Simply put my point is that software can be proprietary or open source, but
>projects which try to do both often end up losing out. I see MySQL as
>trying to do both.
>
>As much as I like the idea of open sourse software, at this time, there is
>still a substantial market for proprietary applications, and although it may
>fade over time (and has already done so considerably), it is a market that
>must open source software must co-exist with rather than simply attempting
>to assimilate or trying to belong to both communities.. This is also why I
>have argued that the GPL is intended for self-contained projects, of which
>MySQL is not, when you include the client libs.
>
>
>