Re: Off Topic: open source databases
From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 13:14:38 +0200
Message-ID: <86evl1Fm5fU1_at_mid.individual.net>
On 30.05.2010 12:01, Robert Klemme wrote:
> And while the plug in architecture of MySQL
> is cool and allows for some nice things to be done (MySQL basically is
> then a SQL parsing and processing engine) it does not feel right for a
> heavy duty database. I know, this is purely subjective.
Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 13:14:38 +0200
Message-ID: <86evl1Fm5fU1_at_mid.individual.net>
On 30.05.2010 12:01, Robert Klemme wrote:
> And while the plug in architecture of MySQL
> is cool and allows for some nice things to be done (MySQL basically is
> then a SQL parsing and processing engine) it does not feel right for a
> heavy duty database. I know, this is purely subjective.
If you need a more factual argument here: I believe the separation between SQL engine and storage engine automatically limits what an optimizer can do to improve query plans since the deails of storage are unknown. I'm not into the details of the MySQL programming model so I may be wrong (i.e. if the storage interface also contains functionality to obtain information about access costs).
Cheers
robert
-- remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/Received on Sun May 30 2010 - 06:14:38 CDT