L
От | Lukas Kahwe Smith |
---|---|
Тема | L |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46C08936.7040302@pooteeweet.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Postgresql vs. MySQL page techdocs conversion (Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: L
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Hi, Sorry for bringing these two points up so late: 1) One of the disadvantages of the multi storage engine concept is that you rally need to tune the settings for each of them independently and that they tend to use separate buffers etc. So in effect one must realize that you are running independent storage components with a single SQL parser! So in the current version of your document you only talk about key buffers, but these will not affect all storage engines! I am not a DB tuning expert, so this should be double checked. 2) In the spirit of MySQL silently ignoring what it does not support, MySQL will actually implicitly commit after several kinds of statements including all DDL. http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/implicit-commit.html Overall I am very impressed with what you have done here. It truly sounds well balanced and I am more versed in MySQL than PostgreSQL. Before we publish it, we might also want to alert some of the high profile MySQL tuning experts and get their comments. I can take care of this if you would like me to. regards, Lukas regards, Lukas
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: