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: Joel Garry <joel-garry_at_home.com>
Date: 14 Jul 2004 14:49:22 -0700
Message-ID: <91884734.0407141349.4c1fcd24@posting.google.com>


afilonov_at_yahoo.com (Alex Filonov) wrote in message news:<336da121.0407131327.363b8e5a_at_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 This sarcasm is obsolete.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.

Sorry, I was in too bad of a mood to be posting at that particular moment. It seems that some of my stuff in OAS has performance issues because of waiting on sqlnet in the middle of transactions, and I was frustrated at not having figured out what was happening yet. I don't think anyone would have _tried_ to do such a thing with mysql. I'm not sure if that is good or bad.

>
> > 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.

Didn't they, like, sell out to SAP? Is that really commercial success? And I'm yet to be convinced any of the *gres's commercial viability. As Daniel pointed out, commercial success is not related to technical superiority.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
I'm so tired.  http://slate.msn.com/id/2103823/
Received on Wed Jul 14 2004 - 16:49:22 CDT

Original text of this message

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