RE: MySQL vs. Oracle database

> load+query (a.k.a., "warehouse") operations it can be faster than
> Oracle because it doesn't get tangled up with rollbacks, etc.

Hmmm... We did some load testing here (with Perl::DBI) and MySQL was very fast with just a few concurrent users but as soon as we cranked up the number of concurrent users MySQL bogged down but Oracle kept going. For read consistency I think MySQL is actually putting locks on tables during a query and when you have some intense queries with a lot of concurrent users they have to wait in line like 1000 rowdy kindergardeners.

Steve Orr

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 1:32 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

• "Weaver, Walt" <wweaver_at_rightnow.com>
  > I don't think you're wrong. MySQL gets dissed frequently on this list, but
  > it's really a nice little product. IMHO it's much closer to Oracle than
  > Access.
  >
  > It works well for us. Doesn't scale like Oracle, but works well.
  

In some ways it scales better than Oracle. For load+query (a.k.a., "warehouse") operations it can be faster than Oracle because it doesn't get tangled up with rollbacks, etc. On systms with many "instances" it also can be much simpler to administer.

--
Steven Lembark                               2930 W. Palmer
Workhorse Computing                       Chicago, IL 60647
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Orr, Steve
  INET: sorr_at_rightnow.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).