add column sillyness

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Thomas,

you know about this problem for quite some time now:

http://www.faqchest.com/prgm/pgsql-l/pgsql-02/pgsql-0203/pgsql-020330/pgsql02031308_14224.html

I assume that you have some experience in database development and since
you know about this for so long, have some idea for us. Can you please
explain in some detail how to do this given the catalog based extensible
functionality of PostgreSQL.

How does MySQL achieve to use an index on a user defined data type where
a user defined max() aggregate was created for?

I know that MySQL is far superior. Unfortunately though some of my
applications use stored procedures, referential actions, updateable
views, triggers, subselects and other features that are not yet
supported by this excellent product. Please let me know when some of
these will be available and until then, just shut up!

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

On Friday 05 December 2003 21:26, Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Thanks, I haven't had such a good laugh for days ;-). You might
want to get a new CMOS battery for your motherboard clock though,
April 1st isn't for another 3 1/2 months.

Ian Barwick
barwick@gmx.net

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Ian Barwick wrote:

On Friday 05 December 2003 21:26, Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Thanks, I haven't had such a good laugh for days ;-). You might
want to get a new CMOS battery for your motherboard clock though,
April 1st isn't for another 3 1/2 months.

That's why I let that one slip through the proverbial cracks ... figured a
few ppl would have a good chuckle :)

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Eric Soroos wrote:

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

You forgot space saving storage of floating point numbers:

He also forgot that it returns far less error messages since it just
assumes "something" whenever the input is unintelligible or if the
requested feature is not what the programmer should want, speed wise.

Oh, and it is much much faster too. For example numeric data does not
use those horrible expensive string math routines for exact precision,
it has full hardware floating point support instead, so it will actually
use your math co-proc (if you have one). These accounting bureaucrats
really shouldn't worry, at that speed one can create many more results
and one will probably be right someday.

Jan

mysql> create table test(foo int);
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.51 sec)

mysql> insert into test (foo) values (1.5);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.42 sec)

mysql> select * from test;
+------+
| foo |
+------+
| 2 |
+------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

eric

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

You forgot space saving storage of floating point numbers:

mysql> create table test(foo int);
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.51 sec)

mysql> insert into test (foo) values (1.5);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.42 sec)

mysql> select * from test;
+------+
| foo |
+------+
| 2 |
+------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

eric

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

You forgot space saving storage of floating point numbers:

mysql> create table test(foo int);
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.51 sec)

mysql> insert into test (foo) values (1.5);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.42 sec)

mysql> select * from test;
+------+
| foo |
+------+
| 2 |
+------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

eric

On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:29:31PM -0800, Eric Soroos wrote:

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of

mysql> insert into test (foo) values (1.5);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.42 sec)

mysql> select * from test;
+------+
| foo |
+------+
| 2 |
+------+

Cool. Where do I download this software?
This is just what I was looking for.

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[@]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Es fil���sofo el que disfruta con los enigmas" (G. Coli)

Bruce Momjian wrote:

"I'm tired of MySQL being beaten up by the PostgreSQL guys. I am going
to fight back! Where is my sword?"

Carefull Bruce. The MySQL sword is razor sharp only on one side and is
missing the handle! But if you succeed to pull it out without cutting
off your fingers, it'll cut everything else to fit without warning ...
if you want that cut or not.

Jan

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Regards
Tom

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

"I'm tired of MySQL being beaten up by the PostgreSQL guys. I am going
to fight back! Where is my sword?"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Regards
Tom

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Jan Wieck wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

"I'm tired of MySQL being beaten up by the PostgreSQL guys. I am going
to fight back! Where is my sword?"

Carefull Bruce. The MySQL sword is razor sharp only on one side and is
missing the handle! But if you succeed to pull it out without cutting
off your fingers, it'll cut everything else to fit without warning ...
if you want that cut or not.

LOL. I thought someone would find this funny.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian wrote:

"I'm tired of MySQL being beaten up by the PostgreSQL guys. I am going
to fight back! Where is my sword?"

Carefull Bruce. The MySQL sword is razor sharp only on one side and is
missing the handle! But if you succeed to pull it out without cutting
off your fingers, it'll cut everything else to fit without warning ...
if you want that cut or not.

"To defeat a superior swordsman, you have to use your sword --
not as a sword -- but rather as something else, like a chain
of a rope."

"This sword technique would be the same for a yari, bo, or
naginata. They are all the same."

Hatsumi Sensei, Hisamune
Bujinkan Budo Ninpo Taijutsu

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

Wow, that's true!

On MySQL 4.0.16-nt is also possible write:

alter table T1
add CONSTRAINT FK_test foreign key (id)
REFERENCES T2 (id);

that doesn't complain. Unfortunately repeating
the command N times doesn't complain neither.
And the funny here is that FK are not yet supported !

No regards.
Gaetano Mendola

----- Original Message -----
From: thomasz@hostmaster.org <Thomas Zehetbauer>
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Date: 05.12.2003 21:26:51
Subject: [GENERAL] add column sillyness

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default \'\';
update users set t_shirt_size=\'\' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

Please, read this carefully: http://sql-info.de/mysql/

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Before blaming all the developers here, you should know that you are shooting without
any effective ammo.....

I am new to [hackers], i know, but i can\'t hold on me while reading this.

Bernd

----- Original Message -----

...
MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- never screwed up any of my databases

Please, read this carefully: http://sql-info.de/mysql/

YIKES!. You don't have to read even at all carefully to see how dangerous
MySQL can be for any kind of important data! I only had general,
non-specific sense of how much better Postgresql was in comparison to
MySQL, but that referenced page not only puts nails in the MySQL coffin,
it completely reverses the sentiments originally expressed!

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be
donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject
to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

~Berend Tober

mailings@oopsware.de wrote:

Please, read this carefully: http://sql-info.de/mysql/

I can not believe it!

Regards
Gaetano Mendola

Shridhar Daithankar wrote:

Hi,

I think it is time to create a pgsql-humour list where such mails can be directed..

No point wasting energy answering such questions especially when they do not
appear sincere..

That troll is known for quite some time ... and he doesn't even read
these comments any more. I allways wonder what he gains from telling
everyone how stupid he is and then walking away. But that's him.

Jan

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

Lucky you..:-)

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Shridhar

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

Hi,

I think it is time to create a pgsql-humour list where such mails can be directed..

No point wasting energy answering such questions especially when they do not
appear sincere..

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

Lucky you..:-)

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Shridhar

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Jan Wieck wrote:

Shridhar Daithankar wrote:

Hi,

I think it is time to create a pgsql-humour list where such mails can be directed..

No point wasting energy answering such questions especially when they do not
appear sincere..

That troll is known for quite some time ... and he doesn't even read
these comments any more. I allways wonder what he gains from telling
everyone how stupid he is and then walking away. But that's him.

well, to be perfectly honest, I think everyone drop'd him off of the CC
list, so he never got any of the 'yo, idiot' messages :)

Jan

Thomas Zehetbauer wrote:

Why do I have to use FOUR queries to accomplish the same result I can
get from MySQL with only ONE query:

alter table users add column $ColumnName text;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set default '';
update users set t_shirt_size='' where $ColumnName is null;
alter table users alter column $ColumnName set not null;

MySQL is CLEARLY SUPERIOR in terms of
- usability
- see above
- performance
- uses index for for min()/max()
- reliability
- no need to use vacuum
- no need to dump and restore databases for version upgrade
- never screwed up any of my databases

Lucky you..:-)

I would therefore urgently recommend that
1) development of postgresql shall be immediately ceased
2) any resources gained thereby (developers, mirrors) shall be donated
to MySQL
3) code produced by the former postgresql developers shall be subject to
a mandatory peer review before it is included in MySQL

Shridhar

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

On a more serious note though I stopped doing comparisons between postgres
and mysql a long time ago. As soon as I realized that it didn't have unions
(yes I know that it does now) I never took it seriously again. But I have
noticed some very good things about firebird. Namely:

tested, solid, native replication both syncronous and asyncronous (at least
they list this as a feature, I assume it works as advertised)
native windows versions
scales down better for embedded apps

The first feature is something that is not a huge deal to me right now but
it probably will be someday. Right now I do a full backup every 15 minutes
and rsync it to a backup db server. As my databases are small right now
this is not much of a problem. I'm hoping that this feature will pop up in
postgres before it becomes a must have.

The last two combined woudl be nice because we have code that runs on both
our web apps running on linux but the same code is also embedded into some
desktop apps that need to run on windows. Right now we just use sqlite and
it works great but it would be nice to know that if I write some code for
the server that it will "just work" on the desktop version because it is the
exact same piece of software.

Of course I'm sure there are many things that postgres has that firebird
doesn't. I think that anyone who knows anything starts investigating open
source databases is going to narrow it down to postgres and firebird. As
important as it might be to have postgers vs mysql comparisons for those who
are aren't aware of mysql's limitations I think it would be very useful to
have a postgres vs firebird comparison.

Does anyone have a link to such a comparison? Also can anyone elaborate on
the features that postgres has that firebird lacks? If there were some
obvious show stoppers in firebird it would save me the time of having to do
a trial port of an app to firebird before I find them on my own.

thanks,

rg

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@myrealbox.com>
To: <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] add column sillyness

Hi,

I think it is time to create a pgsql-humour list where such mails can be

directed..

No point wasting energy answering such questions especially when they do

not