Subject: Re: running PostGres without installing it
From: Amadeus Zilfinski <amadeus0@cox.net>
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <bf05e51c0608061313h28973179nee1b094e660cff26@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060806040747.99775.qmail@web32509.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<bf05e51c0608061109x368a06b3uec4a7c5ff38ff58e@mail.gmail.com>
	<1154891491.3403.11.camel@workstation01.barsandtone.com>
	<bf05e51c0608061313h28973179nee1b094e660cff26@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 20:01:22 -0500
Message-Id: <1154912482.3403.23.camel@workstation01.barsandtone.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> 
>  
> Would something like SQLite support the full functionality that we get
> from PostgreSQL: subqueries, transactions, views, triggers and stored
> procedures?  MySQL does not (yes I know they are adding some or all of
> this but it isn't all there or proven to be reliable yet). 
> 
> I will check SQLite out but MySQL is probably NOT a good option for
> this.  Historically it did not support subqueries (an absolute must
> for any serious database user) - not sure if they have added subquery
> support recently or not. 
> 

SQLite goes for SQL '92 compliance whereas PostgresQL goes for I think
it is) '99 (or is it '95?) compliance.

http://sqlite.org/omitted.html tells you what is missing from the
software against the '92 standard. Against PostgresQL SQLite will lose
in the features department almost every time.

My only real issue with PostgresQL is that it is a client/server
database, that is not embeddable. If it was embeddable then I could use
it with no issue, and would in fact rather use it. I recall some people
are working on that, but don't have any links. You might want to try
www.postgresql.org and see if they any info on there.

AmadeusZ.-