>>>>> "Ben-Nes" == Ben-Nes Michael <miki@stripped> writes:
Ben-Nes> True but 2000$ don't scare big company's
I assume this is per user; Big companies has many employees; This means
that $2000 will be a LOT for big companies if they want to let a major
part of their employees access the database.
Don't forget $200,000 / year on support :)
We have done some speed checking of MySQL against Oracle; If you are
working with the subset of SQL that MySQL supports, MySQL is usually
MUCH faster (10-20 times faster). On the other hand if you are using
a query with many sub selects that can't easily be converted to normal
joins and left joins or if you have to do a query in many steps in
MySQL (with some processing in the client) and in one step in Oracle,
Oracle will probable by faster.
I have heard many claims (and I really think it's true) that Oracle is
good at big tables; The problem is that we haven't been able to
verify this with our benchmarks; According to these, MySQL scales much
better when the file size gets bigger! We hope to someday find
someone that can optimize the benchmarks for Oracle so that we can get
benchmark times for Oracle down to acceptable results.
(The big problem with Oracle seams to be that you REALLY must get to
know Oracle before you can get any performance out of it)
I think that Oracles strength lies more in reliability and capacity to
handle MANY users (with mixed reader/writes) than in fast queries.
(MySQL can also handle MANY users. It's only when you mix many slow queries
with writes and can't let the readers wait as MySQL will not perform as
good as Oracle)
Ben-Nes> info@stripped wrote:
>> You should compare $$$$ to speed as well :-))
>> > >Hi All
>> > >
>> > >I had a little argue with Oracle programer.
>> > >
>> > >I told that MySQL is faster then the Oracel in queries.
>> > >He said "Maybe but Oracle is much faster in complex query when you
>> > >talk on thousand of rows, MySQL is good and fast only with simple
>> > >query".