Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project
От | Madison Kelly |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B2A87EE.1000408@alteeve.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project ("Gauthier, Dave" <dave.gauthier@intel.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Justifying a PG over MySQL approach to a project
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Gauthier, Dave wrote: > Hi Everyone: > > > > Tomorrow, I will need to present to a group of managers (who know > nothing about DBs) why I chose to use PG over MySQL in a project, MySQL > being the more popular DB choice with other engineers, and managers > fearing things that are “different” (risk). I have a few hard tecnical > reasons (check constraint, deferred constraint checking, array data > type), but I’m looking for a “it’s more reliable” reasons. Again, the > audience is managers. Is there an impartial, 3^rd party evaluation of > the 2 DBs out there that identifies PG as being more reliable? It might > mention things like fewer incidences of corrupt tables/indexes, fewer > deamon crashes, better recovery after system crashes, etc... ? > > > > Thanks ! There is a current question about the survivability of MySQL right now with the potential sale of MySQL. I would not bank on MySQL for any long-term project. I am sure that MySQL will live in the long run, but they may well be turbulent times ahead if whomever comes to own MySQL decides to neglect or kill it and the source gets forked. Madi
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: