HP expands open-source support (News.com)
The computing giant will certify and support MySQL, the leading open-source database program, and JBoss, a popular Java-based application server, on HP's industry standard servers."
Posted May 31, 2004 18:05 UTC (Mon)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link] (10 responses)
Posted May 31, 2004 19:41 UTC (Mon)
by einstein (subscriber, #2052)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 1, 2004 12:39 UTC (Tue)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link]
No, it is just that DBs are my bread-and-butter and substandard products keep getting in the way.
Posted May 31, 2004 19:41 UTC (Mon)
by havoc (guest, #2261)
[Link] (1 responses)
thanks.
Posted Jun 1, 2004 12:42 UTC (Tue)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link]
Not SQL compliant.
Too complex with different table types.
Not performing with concurrency.
Developers who don't understand data.
Too fragile.
Posted May 31, 2004 23:20 UTC (Mon)
by lakeland (guest, #1157)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 1, 2004 13:48 UTC (Tue)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link]
That is still so. MySQL still depends on the aberration of table types, it still encourages coding in the application as opposed to declarations in the DBMS, it is still fragile, it still doesn't scale, it still has too many SQL idiosyncrasies.
Posted Jun 1, 2004 0:08 UTC (Tue)
by clugstj (subscriber, #4020)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 1, 2004 17:59 UTC (Tue)
by JohnBell (guest, #12625)
[Link]
Posted Jun 2, 2004 2:24 UTC (Wed)
by marduk (subscriber, #3831)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 16, 2004 1:56 UTC (Wed)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link]
There is quite a difference.
GNU/Linux many not be the Hurd or OS/400 or a Lisp system it is not based on a microkernel with multiple servers, it stores files in an hierarchical filesystem instead of a relational database, it is based on C instead of a functional language but it is quite a decent design.
OTOH MySQL is tragical. There are much better alternatives, including the free ones.
Posted Jun 1, 2004 1:26 UTC (Tue)
by apolinsky (subscriber, #19556)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jun 1, 2004 12:38 UTC (Tue)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link] (3 responses)
At a greater complexity, lower performance, lesser standards compliance than PostgreSQL, requiring more coding.
Posted Jun 1, 2004 19:59 UTC (Tue)
by burki99 (subscriber, #17149)
[Link] (2 responses)
> At a greater complexity, lower performance, lesser standards compliance than PostgreSQL, requiring more coding. that might be true - but as long Mysql is "good enough", "Worse is Better" (http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html) at least for me and probably for many other people out there - no matter how often we get to hear that PostgreSQL is supposedly "better" (whatever "better" exactly means - ease of installation on my windows notebooks is something i value, even if i deploy under linux).
Posted Jun 1, 2004 23:30 UTC (Tue)
by jae (guest, #2369)
[Link]
Spot the difference.
Posted Jun 2, 2004 18:17 UTC (Wed)
by leandro (guest, #1460)
[Link]
Uh... the point of that (classic) article is that Lisp is better and should be used, but that its marketing could use some improvement in order to overcome inertia.
Will someone please shot MySQL to stop it gaining "credibility" against decent SQL DBMSs?
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
Nobody's twisting your arm - if you'd like to use some other database, you're free to do so - but some of us find mysql to be a very nice tool which is just the thing for certain jobs.
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
> Nobody's twisting your arm
please explain what makes MySQL not "decent."HP expands open-source support (News.com)
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
> please explain what makes MySQL not "decent."
mysql wasn't decent when I compared it to postgres. However, that was in HP expands open-source support (News.com)
1999; unless you've got some specific criticism from a feature you
actually use, perhaps you need to reevaluate it too? As I understand it,
the only thing it is really missing now is decent support for recovery
after catastrophic failure (e.g. hardware failure).
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
> mysql wasn't decent when I compared it to postgres. However, that was in
1999
Don't feed the trolls.
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
Even when they have some valid points?
Re: don't feed the trolls
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
"Will someone please shot MySQL to stop it gaining "credibility" against decent SQL DBMSs?"
This sounds like the same thing people were saying about Linux a few years ago.
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
> This sounds like the same thing people were saying about Linux a few years ago.
We use all major databases at work, Oracle, DB2, Informix and Sql Server. I, for one have found Mysql to meet many of the needs of a database. It is fast and reliable. Too often, we harp on the weaknesses of a product, as opposed to the strengths. Mysql handles many web based tasks wonderfully. Perhaps you don't want it to handle a 12 billion accounting system, but properly designed, in fact you might. HP expands open-source support (News.com)
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
> I, for one have found Mysql to meet many of the needs of a database
>> I, for one have found Mysql to meet many of the needs of a databaseHP expands open-source support (News.com)
HP expands open-source support (News.com)
$ apt-get install postgresql
$ apt-get install mysqlHP expands open-source support (News.com)
> "Worse is Better" (http://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html) at least for me