Re: (OT) mySQL vs. Oracle

[Scott Wegener <wegster mindcore net>]

Chad,
	You may want to take a look at PostGreSQL.  I'd looked at mySQL in the
past, the biggest 'bad thing' that immediately comes to mind was the
lack of transaction support.  Other than that, it seemed to be a good
performer.  I DID have some links for performance numbers for several
Linux/*nix DBs, but don't have it handy.  I do remember that mySQL was
up in the top somewhere though, and another developer had used it
extensively on e-commerce web work without problems.  The major
difference you're going to run into with the 'free' DBs versus
Oracle/Sybase/Informix are in the 'add on tools,' such as replication
servers, Windows tools, and things of that nature, which in my opinion
are certainly nice to have, but not always required depending on your
application.

20000 database queries/operations in a day (24 hours) isn't really much
as far as database queries go.  Hmm, unless my math is off for tonight,
24 hours * 60 minutes * 60 seconds = 86400 seconds/day, 20000/86400 =
0.2315, which works out to around a single query every 5 seconds.  This
really isn't that much, assuming of course you aren't doing any
cartesian products ;) and both mySQL and PostGreSQL should see no
problems with it.  I can verify that firsthand with PostGres, and mySQL
if anything, seemed to be faster as I recall.  I've ran postgresql for a
number of days doing nothing but inserting data across several tables,
deleting it, selects, then starting over, without any problems on a
Linux box(stability testing).

If you DO need transaction support, or ansi-compliant SQL, postgres is
probably worth a shot. If you don't need transaction support, give mySQL
a try, at least before paying out that sort of money.  There are also
some 'commercial' alternatives, such as Solid and Interbase, that are
lower cost but not free.

"Chad W. Skinner" wrote:
> 
> I have a couple of questions that have come up in the last week at work and
> both seem rather incorrect to me.
> 
> I am trying to set up a database driven web site and was told by the guy in
> charge of the web that I should use Oracle over mySQL, because Oracle is
> more scalable and requires the client do less work than the server.  My
> question is if you have the same database on Oracle as mySQL and pass an SQL
> query to both will the Oracle not return the same information as mySQL.  If
> they do the client will have to do the same amount of work on the
> information.
> 
> If a web site gets 1,000 or even 10,000 hits and therefore maybe 2,000 to
> 20,000 queries to a database server a day is mySQL not sufficient. It seems
> as thought Oracle would be overkill especially since I am talking at max a
> 10 -20 MB database (most likely 5 -10 MB).
> 
> Since I work for a school district I am concerned about having the district
> fork over the 8,000- 10,000 in TAX dollars to get oracle when in my
> understanding it would be overkill.
> 
> Please, give me advice as I do not know much about database servers and I
> can not find an answer to this on the web.
> 
> Thanks,
> Chad Skinner
> 
> --
>   PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
>                 http://www.redhat.com http://archive.redhat.com
>          To unsubscribe: mail redhat-list-request redhat com with
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.

-- 
===========================================================================
= Scott Wegener		| Email: 	wegster mindcore net
= Software Engineer	|		wegster bitsmart com
= Seagate Software	|
= Raleigh, NC		| Web: 		http://members.tripod.com/~wegster
===========================================================================
= This email sent to you using 100% Microsoft-free electrons.
= Friends don't let friends use Micro$oft.
===========================================================================