Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: oracle - mysql comparison

Re: oracle - mysql comparison

From: Alex Filonov <afilonov_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 13 Jul 2004 14:27:02 -0700
Message-ID: <336da121.0407131327.363b8e5a@posting.google.com>


joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) wrote in message news:<91884734.0407121512.779de651_at_posting.google.com>...
> afilonov_at_yahoo.com (Alex Filonov) wrote in message news:<336da121.0407120722.70d69490_at_posting.google.com>...
> > Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1089413320.371216_at_yasure>...
> > > Alex Filonov wrote:
> > >
> > > >>
> > > >>No comparison and you have missed the most important questions you
> > > >>should be concerned about unless you are running a hotdog stand.
> > > >>
> > > >>1. Where to we call for support if there is a problem we can't solve?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > mysql.com
> > >
> > > Not exactly the same thing as opening a Level 1 TAR.
> > >
> >
> > I don't know all details of MySQL support, but I think you can get pretty
> > good support, including phone hotline, for the price comparable with the
> > price of Oracle support.
> >
> > > > Being open source product doesn't mean "not supported". You can buy
> > > > support contract.
> > >
> > > True. But being available 7x24 and able to support you in the way
> > > Oracle support does requires paying money: And lots of it.
> > >
> >
> > Sure. Oracle support is not cheap either.
> >
> > > >>2. How do we recover transactions that occur between the last backup
> > > >> and the time when the system fails?
> > > >
> > > > There is limited crush recovery.
> > >
> > > Compared with Oracle ... very limited. And it is the issues related
> > > to Murphy's Law that are most important to consider.
> > >
> >
> > Judging by industy experience (Yahoo! and Google are both using MySQL
> > on a big scale), things aren't that bad...
>
> They are if you care about transactions and consistency. Yahoo and

This sarcasm is obsolete. MySQL has pretty decent transactional support. As for consistency (I suppose you mean read-only), it's implemented in ProgreSQL, another Open Source DB engine. BTW, other commercial RMBDS (DB2, MSSQL) don't have read-only consistency and sell pretty well at that.

> Google don't have to. <sarcasm> If you miss a web page here or there,
> so what? Lose a sale in the middle, who cares, the customer will call
> if he's unhappy, soon enough. Mailing lists? Blame it all on spam
> filters.</sarcasm>
>

Well, commercial companies are using the tool successfully, making tons of money. We can grump whatever we want (I'd be happy to see everybody using Oracle), but the tool is a commercial success.

> >
> > Myself, I wouldn't recommend MySQL for critical applications as yet.
> > But things are moving pretty fast in the Open Source world...
>
> Once you build that handbasket, Hell isn't far.
>
> jg
Received on Tue Jul 13 2004 - 16:27:02 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US