Ron Mayer wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> > - MySQL's feature set corresponds to ...:
> > mostly read-only, simple SQL, design implemented by developers, so no
> > DBA required.
> >
> > - PostgreSQL's feature set works for "difficult/complex" web apps.
>
> Really. It looks to me like MySQL's niche that postgresql doesn't yet
> touch is in the most complex, most insert/update intensive applications.
>
> The two reference MySQL projects that first come to my mind are
> the Sabre airline system[1]; and Google Adwords[2,3]. Both
> extremely update intensive applications - far beyond what I see
> PostgreSQL being used for.
I think though the applications themselves are update-intensive, MySQL's
role in the application is mostly as read-only web storage. There are
other databases behind Sabre for sure that do the actual update load.
Also, MySQL's 0.050B revenue isn't representitive of its installed base
or growth as with the commercial companies.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +