PG vs MySQL

Hey,

Entering "postgresql vs. mysql" on Google turned up 16,300 results. The
first one was a decent article from just two months ago, while the second
hit was the somewhat infamous Perdue article from PHPBuilder. Search
engines are your friend.

There are also a few mentions of MySQL in the PostgreSQL FAQ:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq-english.html

Yes, this question has been asked before, beaten to death a million times,
then asked again. And again. The flames spread out all across the 'Net,
from newsgroups to Slashdot.

J

p.s. The "[GENERAL]" thingy is the name of this list/newsgroup, i.e.
comp.databases.postgresql.general. [GENERAL] == ".general".

Andrey Shcherbina wrote:

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who switched from mySQL to
PostgreSQL. Why? Because the latter has a number of capabilities that the
former is lacking, chief among these being:

1. transactions
2. views
3. subqueries

Andrey Shcherbina wrote:

Hi,

I'm sure this question was asked before but I can't find the answer.

I've just started looking at options of runnnig Linux-based (actually, I
need something free :) database engines with MS Access as a front-end. I
can't find any comparison between PostgreSQL and MySQL. It seems so far
that PG is better (people tend to migrate to PG, not vice versa) and
that's why I'm asking this question on PG newsgroup but not on MySQL.
Anyway, it would be really nice to have that information on what exactly
is different in the engines.

Thank you,
Andrey Shcherbina

--
Stuart Robinson [stuart@zapata.org]

and never forget foreign keys :)

They make life so easy.
--------------------------
Canaan Surfing Ltd.
Internet Service Providers
Ben-Nes Michael - Manager
Tel: 972-4-6991122
http://sites.canaan.co.il
--------------------------

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Robinson" <stuart@zapata.org>
To: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PG vs MySQL

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who switched from mySQL to
PostgreSQL. Why? Because the latter has a number of capabilities that the
former is lacking, chief among these being:

1. transactions
2. views
3. subqueries

Andrey Shcherbina wrote:

Hi,

I'm sure this question was asked before but I can't find the answer.

I've just started looking at options of runnnig Linux-based (actually,

I

need something free :) database engines with MS Access as a front-end.

I

can't find any comparison between PostgreSQL and MySQL. It seems so

far

that PG is better (people tend to migrate to PG, not vice versa) and
that's why I'm asking this question on PG newsgroup but not on MySQL.
Anyway, it would be really nice to have that information on what

exactly

Here's the answer....It depends.

From what I hear, MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL when returning rows, so if
you are building this for a web site and want a REALLY basic backend
database...well then go with MySQL.

But, PostgreSQL is more of a real database as it supports more SQL standards
(like what Stuart said below).
I guess I would hold PostgreSQL up there with other Midrange databases as
Oracle and Sybase.

For my personal choice, I use MySQL for really small sites that don't really
need the database that much and for everything else I use PostgreSQL; once
again because of it's support for SQL.

Thanks, I hope this helps.

Troy Campano

-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Robinson [mailto:stuart@zapata.org]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:26 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PG vs MySQL

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who switched from mySQL to
PostgreSQL. Why? Because the latter has a number of capabilities that the
former is lacking, chief among these being:

1. transactions
2. views
3. subqueries

Andrey Shcherbina wrote:

Hi,

I'm sure this question was asked before but I can't find the answer.

I've just started looking at options of runnnig Linux-based
(actually, I need something free :) database engines with MS Access
as a front-end. I can't find any comparison between PostgreSQL and
MySQL. It seems so far that PG is better (people tend to migrate to
PG, not vice versa) and that's why I'm asking this question on PG
newsgroup but not on MySQL. Anyway, it would be really nice to have
that information on what exactly is different in the engines.

Thank you,
Andrey Shcherbina

--
Stuart Robinson [stuart@zapata.org]

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html

Thanks guyz.

Yep, now I read the FAQ and your replies and I have no doubt that I'll go
with PostgreSQL because I can't even imagine a modern database without
subqueries, foreign keys and tons of other stuff that MySQL doesn't
implement.

"Stuart Robinson" <stuart@zapata.org> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.30.0111211122120.2565-100000@dreamingameric.com...

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who switched from mySQL to
PostgreSQL. Why? Because the latter has a number of capabilities that the
former is lacking, chief among these being:

1. transactions
2. views
3. subqueries

Andrey Shcherbina wrote:

Hi,

I'm sure this question was asked before but I can't find the answer.

I've just started looking at options of runnnig Linux-based (actually,

I

need something free :) database engines with MS Access as a front-end.

I

can't find any comparison between PostgreSQL and MySQL. It seems so

far

that PG is better (people tend to migrate to PG, not vice versa) and
that's why I'm asking this question on PG newsgroup but not on MySQL.
Anyway, it would be really nice to have that information on what

exactly

On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Stuart Robinson wrote:

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people who switched from mySQL to
PostgreSQL. Why? Because the latter has a number of capabilities that the
former is lacking, chief among these being:

1. transactions
2. views
3. subqueries

same here. plus UNION (yes i know you could do this in MySQL with separate
selects into a temporary table) and foreign keys.

a while back i was looking to port all of our stuff to pgsql when I
couldn't get MySQL to run stable on my NetBSD/Alpha machine cause of
threading issues. But I got that resolved with MySQL (used to crash a lot
but haven't for months). Then there was that limitation of the 8K issue
that's long resolved with pgsql. And I had to wait for emulated soft
floats to work on NetBSD/Alpha (thanks to Ross Harvey from NetBSD).

as Minnesota.com expands, I'm starting to see limitations of MySQL, very
smiliar to what Tim Purdue stated in his article. All the things I didn't
need before (transactions, views, subqueries, triggers, UNION), I find I
now need. In my process or portign and making my PHP apps for DB
independent, I found myself making lots of special IF/ELSE cases for MySQL
because it's not as standard (case in point, '||' in MySQL is the OR
operator, where it should be concat).

I'd still recommend MySQL for applications that are small and don't forsee
it growing very large, because their interface and setup is much easier to
understand for a beginner.

Yeah, the dead horse has been beaten thoroughly already, but this is
a great autopsy:

http://openacs.org/philosophy/why-not-mysql.html

--Russ