>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <maillist@stripped> writes:
>> [I skipped the PHP3 list because there this discussion is even more
>> off-topic than here ...]
>> On Sun 1999-10-03 22:30:44 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> > Second, the MySQL folks don't mention the features they _don't_ have,
>> > except now they mention they don't have transactions.
>> Well, maybe nobody told you, but see chapter "5.3 Functionality
>> missing from MySQL" of the MySQL Reference Manual ...
> http://www.mysql.com/Manual_chapter/manual_Compatibility.html#Missing_functions >
Bruce> Let me clarify. I do mention MySQL specifically on the FAQ at:
Bruce> and it says:
Bruce> In comparison to MySQL or leaner database systems, we are slower on
Bruce> inserts/updates because we have transaction overhead. Of course, MySQL
Bruce> doesn't have any of the features mentioned in the Features section
Bruce> above. We are built for flexibility and features, though we continue to
Bruce> improve performance through profiling and source code analysis.
Bruce> I am glad to listen to any comments about this statement.
It would be very nice you could add to the above the features that
MySQL has that postgreSQL is missing. PostgreSQL does have some
features that MySQL lacks, but MySQL does support a lot of ODBC and
ANSI SQL things that postgreSQL doesn't support. We have also put a
lot of effort in MySQL to implement a lot of useful functions from a
lot of different SQL servers. This is why MySQL 'shows off' on
crash-me; If someone else has some useful functionality/syntax, we also try
to support it!
MySQL is not only faster on inserts/updates, but is also faster on a
lot of things that only concerns retrieval. This is just because
MySQL do optimize a lot of things better than PostgreSQL. To just
talk about transactions overhead is missing the whole point with
On the other hand, it's of course true that PostgreSQL does optimize
some things better than MySQL (for example select on different keys).
(This is shown in the newest MySQL benchmark results at