Re: Why choose PostreSQL and not MySQL or Oracle!!
От | Andrew Sullivan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why choose PostreSQL and not MySQL or Oracle!! |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020815112940.I5642@mail.libertyrms.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Why choose PostreSQL and not MySQL or Oracle!! (Preben Holm <preben@cyberserver.dk>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why choose PostreSQL and not MySQL or Oracle!!
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:33:57AM +0200, Preben Holm wrote: > > F.x. StoredProcedures - is that supported by PostgreSQL? Yes, but these mean different things (practically, it seems, for every RDBMS). The big thing with stred procedures in PostgreSQL is that they cannot (currently) return record sets, exactly. For more detail, you can read the docs and the archives. > "And actually mySQL has transaction safe tables using the innoDB or BDB > table type" - does the PostreSQL support that too!?? PostgreSQL has always had transactions. You need do nothing special. > I've seen all the awards at the web-site - but why doesn't we hear > anything about PostgreSQL - it's always MySQL (in the world of free > alternatives)... PostgreSQL - is it a slow database (compared to MySQL)? MySQL had an early head start. It was small and fast (although just brutally non-standard, and something of a toy). Now it has transactions (but not subselects), and so it's a more reasonable choice, although the transaction support is bought at the cost of speed. For more details on this, just have a look at the archives. There are regular MySQL/PostgreSQL flame-fests, but sometimes they have some useful information in them. -- ---- Andrew Sullivan 87 Mowat Avenue Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada <andrew@libertyrms.info> M6K 3E3 +1 416 646 3304 x110
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: