On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:54:50PM -0400, Russell Coker wrote:
> > Not to feed the trolls, but I'm using mysql at our company since '99.
> > It have good performance and so far no serious problems.
>
> Lots of people have used flat-files much longer and found them to have
> adequate performance for their needs.
Yes, as I do in some cases too. But when I need SQL interface with
resonable fast search, ordering, rather complicated filtering etc. but
still not some heavy RDBMS beast - then I use MySQL.
> Saying that something has "good performance" without specifying what is good
> means little.
Providing support for few thousand of RADIUS entryes, qmail/vpopmail,
Apache SQL logging etc. Perfaps I can write detailed report about our
setup here, but it'll take at least 2-3 extra pages...
> Saying that one product is "good" has no relevance to a comparison of two
> products.
I got the impression that MySQL is classified as a toy. Not compared to
anything but just a toy ;-?
Nevermind.
Kindest regards,
--
Theodor Milkov Administrator IP Networks
Davidov Electric Ltd. Phone: +359 (2) 730158
PGP: http://www.zimage.delbg.com/zimage.asc
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
