Re: mysql Compare with postgres? (Re: Advice needed on large database project)

psmith_at_baynetworks.com (Paul D. Smith) writes:

> MySQL also uses threads, while Postgres uses a new process for each
> client access (last time I looked). Which one is better is somewhat a
> religious issue, but I prefer threads myself.
>
> But you're right, Postgres has the most featurful SQL support. If you
> really need full-fledged SQL you should start there.

Hmm, no primary keys? No multi-table indexes(indexing two or more fields across table,s or indexing two or more fields alone) without having to write a bunch of SQL and make surrogate types. I have yet to see anything about outer joins(are they there at all?), no triggers(well you can rewrite functions). On the other hand it's free.

I would stay away from msql, last time i looked it has osme major security problems(buffer overflows). Maybe they have been fixed by now.

I have used PostgreSQL to write a rather large web based application, and I'm dissapointed by it's lack of support for some of these features, and it's performance(subjective analysis only YMMV).

I'm looking at giving MySQL a shot soon.

-- 
Craig Brozefsky              craig_at_onshore.com
onShore Inc.                 http://www.onshore.com/~craig
Development Team             p_priority=PFUN+(p_work/4)+(2*p_cash)