From: mlw <pgsql@mohawksoft.com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
Cc: Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net>
Cc: Brent Verner <brent@rcfile.org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Are we losing momentum?
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 07:51:30 -0400
Message-ID: <3E9BF242.8030109@mohawksoft.com> (raw)
References: <200304142237.h3EMbvv13720@candle.pha.pa.us>
<2703.1050364467@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20030415015217.GA96608@rcfile.org>
<Pine.NEB.4.51.0304151132210.385@angelic-vtfw.cvpn.cynic.net>
<053501c302f9$b6da54e0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal>
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>>That's a pretty reasonable thought. I work for a shop that sells
>>Postgres support, and even we install MySQL for the Q&D ticket tracking
>>system we recommend because we can't justify the cost to port it to
>>postgres. If the postgres support were there, we would surely be using it.
>>
>>How to fix such a situation, I'm not sure. "MySQL Compatability Mode,"
>>anyone? :-)
>>
>>
>
>The real problem is PHP. PHP is just the cruftiest language ever invented (trust me, I use it every day). The PHP people are totally dedicated to MySQL, to the exclusion of all rational thought (eg. When I asked Rasmas at a conference about race conditions in his replicated setup, he replied "it's never going to happen - MySQL's replication is just too fast...).
>
>
>
Hey! don't go knocking PHP, it is probably one of the most flexible and
easy to use systems around. I have done several fairly large projects
with PHP and while it is an "ugly" environment, it performs well enough,
has a very usable extension interface, it is quick and easy to even
large projects done.
As for MySQL, there are two things that PostgreSQL does not do, and
probably can not do to support MySQL:
(1) REPLACE INTO (I think that's the name) which does either an insert
or update into a table depending on the existence of a row. I was told
that this was impossible.
(2) MySQL returns a value on insert which is usually usable, for instance,
insert into mytable (x,y,z) values(1,2,3);
select rowid from mytable where x=1 and y=2 and z=3;
I have had many discussions with MySQL people, and one common thread
exists. People who use MySQL do not usually understand databases all
that well. Arguments about *why* it is a horrible database and barely
SQL at all, fall on deaf ears. They don't understand PostgreSQL, they
complain that it is "too big." They complain that it is "too much,"
MySQL is all they need. They complain that it is "too hard" to use.
All of these things are largely imagined. PostgreSQL is not much bigger
than MySQL, in fact, the difference is negligible with regards to
average system capability these days. It isn't any more difficult to
use, its just a little different. They, however, feel safe with MySQL.
MySQL is the Microsoft of databases, everyone uses it because everyone
uses it, not because it is better or even adequate.
We need to take projects like Bugzilla (Did RH ever release the PG
version or am I way out of date?) and port them to PostgreSQL. We need
to write free articles for Linux and IT magazines about how to take a
MySQL project over to PostgreSQL easily, why PostgreSQL is much better
than MySQL, lastly we have to play the MySQL benchmark game .. we need
to create a Benchmark program that clearly shows how PostgreSQL compares
to MySQL.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql@mohawksoft.com, chriskl@familyhealth.com.au, cjs@cynic.net, brent@rcfile.org
Subject: Re: Are we losing momentum?
In-Reply-To: <3E9BF242.8030109@mohawksoft.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox