postgres, does replication, and mysql just doesn't cut the mustard.

[David Swain]

Sure, anyone can make MySQL look bad by simply using an inappropriate storage engine and doing dumb things. I've shown those things in MySQL classes for years and then shown the proper configuration setting to keep them from happening. Not a big deal.

Oracle owning it hasn't helped any, though. Get the MariaDB version (drop-in replacement) from the originator and his team for a much better experience. Then learn something and treat the software correctly.

Regards,

David (with private citizen hat on)

On Dec 21, 2013, at 7:41 PM, Doug Easterbrook wrote:

> I'm sorry, I couldn't let this utter fallacy go. 
> 
> 3) Considering that Postgres does not natively replicate, I would still find MySQL, Oracle or even MS-SQL
> necessary for large volume or HA installations.
> Any thoughts on this?
> 
> 
> Facts: 
> postgres' streaming replication sever is the best thing since sliced bread.  http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Streaming_Replication  We've got it working at half a dozen client sites and it just works.
> 
> people who care about the robustness of there db server, validity, and integrity of their data use an ACID compliant database.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACID
> 
> People who don't care if their inserts or updates work reliably and don't mind data corruption use MySQL.    This link does a pretty hefty compare of the two.
> http://www.wikivs.com/wiki/MySQL_vs_PostgreSQL  (see section on acid compliance).
> https://www.scriptrock.com/blog/postgre-vs-mysql/ (see bottom section on ACID compliance)
> http://gigaom.com/2011/07/07/facebook-trapped-in-mysql-fate-worse-than-death/ (thats an interesting article)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emgJtr9tIME (norwegian developer conference that shows mysql's default approach ACID compliance in real examples of the server both making up and losing data and ignoring you and not informing you with errors -- this is worth a watch :)!!!)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJbBkPI_7_E  (for those that like cartoons - I love the comment about MySQL vomiting data onto the disk - lol)
> 
> the database needs to preserve the data integrity over anything the programmer throws at it.    Postgres does.  Thats not MySQL's general practice
> 
> 
> 
> We run hundreds of postgres databases - no data loss due to the database server.
> 
> 
> I've run 3 mysql databases on different machines -- and,  yes we've lost rows...  Wasn't happy.  Am still not happy with it.  So we are migrating to MS SQL for the product we are using so at least the data will live.
> 
> 
> 
> and the best point -- postgres is free, unencumbered by licensing, fast, complete.  MySql is encumbered under GPL .. meaning - be careful lest you get caught with your pants down and have to GPL your source code.
> 
> 
> so, back to the postulation: If you want high availability -- make your own choice -- but leave MySql out of consideration.   
> 
> 
> Doug Easterbrook
> Arts Management Systems Ltd.
> mailto:doug at artsman.com
> http://www.artsman.com
> Phone (403) 536-1205    Fax (403) 536-1210
> 
> On Dec 21, 2013, at 10:00 AM, omnisdev-en-request at lists.omnis-dev.com wrote:
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________________________
> Manage your list subscriptions at http://lists.omnis-dev.com