It maybe simple and fast but you are required to do alot in the programming end to compensate for stuff that a database server should do for you maybe Oracle has spoilt us with triggers and the like, merge tables are worth crap they don't work as advertised in the docs, maybe in MySQL 4.x.
The only thing that I dislike about Postgres is the case-sensitivity of data in the database, if anybody knows how to turn it off let me know. The web application thanks to a couple of prebuilt functions I think about 1024 saved our tushes as we would have had to do this ourselves, as someone mentioned views are also important, we have a few many in fact that have saved us many troubles, they apparently like merge tables in MySQL but they are not editable in Postgres, which I think would be a handy feature. Also maybe the Postgres folk will think of implementing column/row-wise triggering as opposed to table-wise triggering sometime soon. Postgres I maintain is Oracle like and way way better than MySQL and cheaper and maybe somewhat like Oracle, but Oracle still the best no doubt. On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 05:18, gabriel wrote: > i've been a fan of mysql as of late because it's simple and fast. AND the > documentation is great. postgres is the opposite of all of the above. > > On November 18, 2002 04:50 am, Shiva Haddad wrote: > > I want to have client , server database in redhat for a IP Telephone system > > product, it must be multi-user & ... > > which one is better , Mysql or postgresql ? > > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- Aly S.P Dharshi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Student and System Administrator ORS Servers "A good speech is like a good dress that's short enough to be interesting and long enough to cover the subject" -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
