[ic] postgres vs mysql

[Jeff Dafoe]

> MySQL 3.23.15 introduced experimental support for Berkeley DB to handle
> transactions (5/9/2000).

    The berkeleydb route to transactions is a kludge, mysql using berkeleydb
runs at a fraction of the speed of any other database server I have ever
seen.

> So, I think MySQL is alive and kicking....Yes, I like MySQL.  But with all
> that said and done, I have heard good stuff about PostgresQL 7.0, and I
plan
> on checking it out.

    We used to be an all-mysql shop but switched to postgres about 8 months
back as version 7 just offers too much over mysql.  I was aware of the
availability of the berkeleydb flavor of mysql but until the code is more
refined I don't consider that anything other than a novelty.  Implementing
transactional support this far into the software's life and then having to
refine the code to get the performance back up will be a significant feat.
I suspect that postgres will remain ahead for quite some time, the primary
area for improvement would be blob support and a more advanced
security/permissions system.  Mysql now has the start of replication, I
would expect to see that coming in postgres also.  It just looks like the
mysql team has their work cut out for them whereas the postgres team doesn't
really have anything too intricate that needs to be done.  Now lets see one
of those development teams take on multi-phase commit and then we will be
talking!
    Mysql does seem to still be more widely used by far, it does have a
serious foothold, and there is nothing wrong with it.


Jeff