Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?

From: CSN <cool_screen_name90001(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?
Date: 2005-10-08 18:04:24
Message-ID: 20051008180424.16774.qmail@web52903.mail.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general

> On 10/6/2005 4:37 AM, Tzvetan Tzankov wrote:
>
> > They have collation and multiple characterset per
table and etc. which actually is from 4.1 (not new in
5.0), and postgresql have only one collation per
database cluster :-(
> > Otherwise I think their features are all there,
but cannot be used togather most of them (you can have
foreign key, but not using fulltext ...)
>
>
> AFAIK MySQL's fulltext indexing is only supported on
MyIsam tables, so if you want to use it, you lose
ACID, hot backup and a couple other nice things
entirely for that part of your data. Many MySQL users
still believe that the pluggable storage engine design
is an advantage ... I think one storage engine that
supports the full feature set is better.
>
> Jan

I agree - MySQL really has a confusing array of
different database engines:

# MyISAM
# MERGE
# ISAM
# HEAP
# InnoDB
# BDB or BerkeleyDB Tables
# Example
# Archive
# Federated
# CSV
# Blackhole
# NDB Cluster

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/storage-engines.html

CSN


__________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Dean 2005-10-08 18:22:11 Re: Oracle buys Innobase
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2005-10-08 17:42:26 Re: Oracle buys Innobase

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Dean 2005-10-08 18:22:11 Re: Oracle buys Innobase
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2005-10-08 17:42:33 Re: PostgreSQL Gotchas