RE: mysql - OT
- From: "Joel Garry" <joelgarry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:10:57 -0700
Max wrote:
>The central principle that MySQL has followed in the past, FWIU, (and I
>hope they continue following) is that the database should be a dumb and
>fast storage container for data, nothing more. I've always been happy
>with this approach and really have no complaints about MySQL, neither
>while developing applications against it nor while administering it (I
>always only used InnoDB table format, the one that supports
>transactions, PITR, etc). It's very nice to keep all your code in the
>application layer and only worry about true RDBMS stuff in the
database.
>The recent push on the part of MySQL to add stored procedure, etc, is
>them trying to appease the people that demand them because MySQL
>apparently is trying to compete against the big guys now. However,
their
>real success and niche has always been small-medium databases powering
>web sites, and I'm not aware of any other product that can beat MySQL
in
>that "market".
If performance is why you don't want stored procedures, you probably
don't understand set theory and that you don't want to be sending result
sets back and forth and
waiting...for...the...transport...to...ask...the...database...to...do...
each ...part...of...a...complex...set...of...operations.
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:127040951323929135::NO::F495
0_P8_DISPLAYID,F4950_P8_CRITERIA:12083187196917
And as far as those medium sized websites being powered by mysql, I LOL
every time I see an error message in _my_ browser exposing _the
website's_ database problems.
Joel Garry
http://www.garry.to
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
