On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 luuk@stripped wrote:
> The competition is maybe a good idea but a lot of database
> people will say ... no transaction support / subqueries / views
> you can't get serious about mysql ....
> that will be another big discussion I think ...
On the other hand. I could not get Oracle 8.0.5 to run out of the box on
one of the suported platforms. This left me far less than impressed. After
I managed to find the problem(Oracle still did not get back to me with a
fix) I tried to get some support from Oracle to get the Oracle/DBD
interface software to run on another platform. As you should be able to
guess I Had no luck. Oracle seems to have a much better marketing program
than support program.
The issue has yet to be settled but I expect our customer will be using
Mysql instead of Oracle. Why you may ask. The answer is support. There was
no requirement for functions like transatctions, subqueries or views.
Granted this is not an extreemly complex application but it is mission
critical to our customer.
I am not a DBA for a fortune500 company but of the 20-30 projects that I
have been part of over the last 5 years I have not yet seen a project that
required the features of Oracle. I also expect that 90-95% of all web
based applications that require a database can get by quite well with
> With such a competition you won't say anything about the
> stability but only about performance.
It may be possible to collect statistics on patches,bugfixes, and
workarounds for each DB and then compare the numbers to see who in general
who has the more reliable product. This of corse will be no easy task.
> Maybe we first have to decide if you can at this moment compare
> mysql with oracle. Maybe the database engine is faster and more
> stabel as the one from oracle. But that isn't the only thing
> oracle is delivering. They deliver also some GUI around it, the
That is the point of a DB compition. I am sure that there are equivilant
products to the Oracle products out there that will work with MySQL and a
hand full of other databses.
> name, the company etc etc .... and what you can't forget it's
> easier to find an new employee who knows oracle as one who knows
> mysql (by thinking of the companies perspective) and I think a
> lot of people will select the database more on the latest part
> as of the database engine.
I hate this argument. It has been used mostly do justify stupid decisions.
If this argument were really true than we would all be using IBM hardware
and IBM software to the exclusion of all else. MySQL has a place in the
range of database products that need to be available to allow people to
build applications. The thing is to identify the place wher MySQL best
fits and then use that informatin.
> But if we would like to start an contest why aren't we trying to
> do a tcp d benchmark first to see how mysql is doing.
I would love to have a list of statistics and comparisons that I can point
to that will help me convince customers that they do not need to use
Oracle for a 10000 record database that is part of there web presence.
Alvin Starr || voice: (416)585-9971
Interlink Connectivity || fax: (416)585-9974