Monty on MySQL 5.1: "Oops, we did it again"

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Steve Crawford <
scrawford@pinpointresearch.com> wrote:

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/11/oops-we-did-it-again-mysql-51-released.html

All interesting, but especially the part about half-way down under the
heading "So what went wrong with MySQL 5.1 ?" - must-read for anyone
involved in selecting a database.

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How reliable
it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a step ahead in
that regard.
Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a blog :)

--
GJ

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Steve Crawford
<scrawford@pinpointresearch.com> wrote:

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/11/oops-we-did-it-again-mysql-51-released.html

All interesting, but especially the part about half-way down under the
heading "So what went wrong with MySQL 5.1 ?" - must-read for anyone
involved in selecting a database.

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How reliable
it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a step ahead in
that regard.
Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a blog :)

I'd rather do the paritioning by hand and use slony and know it works
than rely on the code that's doing all that in mysql. If your server
crashes while updating a partitioned table, you could lose all the
data in it. Replication can mysteriously just quit working with no
errors or warning.

Make your pick, half assed code that sometimes works, or postgresql. :)

On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 20:05 +0000, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Steve Crawford
<scrawford@pinpointresearch.com> wrote:
http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/11/oops-we-did-it-again-mysql-51-released.html

All interesting, but especially the part about half-way down
under the heading "So what went wrong with MySQL 5.1 ?" -
must-read for anyone involved in selecting a database.

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How
reliable it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a
step ahead in that regard.

Depends on your needs, a broken step is worse than a manual one.

Joshua D. Drake

Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a blog :)

--
GJ

--
PostgreSQL
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997

2008/12/1 Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>:

I'd rather do the paritioning by hand and use slony and know it works
than rely on the code that's doing all that in mysql. If your server
crashes while updating a partitioned table, you could lose all the
data in it. Replication can mysteriously just quit working with no
errors or warning.

Make your pick, half assed code that sometimes works, or postgresql. :)

FYI, my reference up there was to MySQL doing those things (losing
data and not replicating) not pgsql...

On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 08:05:48PM +0000, Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in.

That will provide excellent comfort to the users.

HaplessUser: Your replication crashed and took all of my slaves with
it, and then my primary database crashed and I had an outage! You
cost me $BIGNUM dollars in downtime!

MySQLSupport: Well, at least replication is built in!

HaplessUser: But it's broken! You broke my database! I lost data!
This is buggy! Why am I paying you?

MySQLSupport: Built in! Built in! Built in! LALALALA.

Yep. Comforting, that.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@crankycanuck.ca

Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Steve Crawford
<scrawford@pinpointresearch.com <mailto:scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>>
wrote:

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/11/oops-we-did-it-again-mysql-51-released.html

All interesting, but especially the part about half-way down under
the heading "So what went wrong with MySQL 5.1 ?" - must-read for
anyone involved in selecting a database.

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How
reliable it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a step
ahead in that regard.
Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a blog :)

Actually, he has a couple of them:

pgsql-general@postgresql.org
admin@postgresql.org
.
.

:)

--
Until later, Geoffrey

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

Geoffrey wrote:

Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Steve Crawford
<scrawford@pinpointresearch.com
<mailto:scrawford@pinpointresearch.com>> wrote:

http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2008/11/oops-we-did-it-again-mysql-51-released.html

All interesting, but especially the part about half-way down under
the heading "So what went wrong with MySQL 5.1 ?" - must-read for
anyone involved in selecting a database.

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How
reliable it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a
step ahead in that regard. Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a
blog :)

Actually, he has a couple of them:

pgsql-general@postgresql.org
admin@postgresql.org
.
.

:)

I'm very happy and proud to use Postgresql as the developers working on
Postgresql deliver a quality product, not claim its quality.

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant a
2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have guessed
that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

Greg Smith wrote:

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant
a 2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have
guessed that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for
me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was
looking for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.

I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

"Sun Picks Up MySQL For $1 Billion"
<http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/01/16/sun-picks-up-mysql-for-1-billion-open-source-is-a-legitimate-business-model/&gt;
to bad for them they did not go with PostgreSQL. :)

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Jason Long
<mailing.list@supernovasoftware.com> wrote:

Greg Smith wrote:

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant a
2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have guessed
that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was looking
for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.

I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

"Sun Picks Up MySQL For $1 Billion" to bad for them they did not go with
PostgreSQL. :)

It's free. The pgsql community, however, is priceless.

Scott Marlowe wrote:

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Jason Long
<mailing.list@supernovasoftware.com> wrote:

Greg Smith wrote:

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant a
2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have guessed
that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was looking
for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.

I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

"Sun Picks Up MySQL For $1 Billion" to bad for them they did not go with
PostgreSQL. :)

It's free. The pgsql community, however, is priceless.

No doubt. The pgsql community rocks. In fact the support on this
mailing list is top notch and free. :)

Thank you a million times over to anyone that has give me advice here.
I have never gotten bad advice from this list.

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Geoffrey <lists@serioustechnology.com>wrote:

Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz wrote:

well, at least they have replication and partitioning built in. How
reliable it is, is completely another story - but still, they are a step
ahead in that regard. Now I know why Tom Lane doesn't have a blog :)

Actually, he has a couple of them:

pgsql-general@postgresql.org
admin@postgresql.org
.

which reminds me, of my favourite recent quote:
"Think I'll go fix this while I'm watching the football game ..."

--
GJ

"=?UTF-8?Q?Grzegorz_Ja=C5=9Bkiewicz?=" <gryzman@gmail.com> writes:

which reminds me, of my favourite recent quote:
"Think I'll go fix this while I'm watching the football game ..."

Well, the Steelers were up 23-10 at that point, so the game no longer
demanded too much attention ...

regards, tom lane

Jason Long wrote:

Greg Smith wrote:

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant
a 2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have
guessed that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for
me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD

I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was
looking for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.

I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

Monty is quite supportive of Postgres.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

As I read it, he is supportive of the community process that PG follows; I
am not so sure he promotes Postgres though :)

On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:56 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

Jason Long wrote:

Greg Smith wrote:

I wonder if I'm the only one who just saved a copy of that post for
reference in case it gets forcibly removed...

Recently I was thinking about whether I had enough material to warrant
a 2008 update to "Why PostgreSQL instead of MySQL"; who would have
guessed that Monty would do most of the research I was considering for
me?

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore,

MD

I quit using MySQL years ago when the default table type did not have
transactions and subqueries were not existent. The features I was
looking for were already in PostgreSQL for several versions.

I am surprised to see such an honest post regarding MySQL.

Monty is quite supportive of Postgres.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
gurjeet[.singh]@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | indiatimes | yahoo }.com

EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

Mail sent from my BlackLaptop device

Gurjeet Singh wrote:

As I read it, he is supportive of the community process that PG follows; I
am not so sure he promotes Postgres though :)

I based my comments on discussions I have had with him, not based on his
blog.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +