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/
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 |
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 |