April 26, 2012 at 4:43 pm
I may have to become a MySQL DBA instead of a Microsoft SQL Server DBA.
:crying:
April 26, 2012 at 5:52 pm
have fun learning the new product. did your company decide to switch from the {extreme sarcasm} evil closed source model to the wonderful sent from heaven open source free model{/extreme sarcasm}?
i wonder why the switch.
For performance Issues see how we like them posted here: How to Post Performance Problems - Gail Shaw[/url]
Need to Split some strings? Jeff Moden's DelimitedSplit8K[/url]
Jeff Moden's Cross tab and Pivots Part 1[/url]
Jeff Moden's Cross tab and Pivots Part 2[/url]
April 26, 2012 at 5:55 pm
capn.hector (4/26/2012)
i wonder why the switch.
Because they don't have to pay license fees for MySQL? Seen that disaster more than once.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
April 26, 2012 at 6:51 pm
sniff, sniff, sniff. . .:crying:
I'm very very sad. Yeah fine - Linux RedHat, Mongo NoSQL, and no more Microsoft.
I never:
- Got to meet Gail
- Got to go to PASS
- Certified in 70-432 nor 70-450...
I love SQL Server. Hopefully I wind up loving MySQL too. Good news is that it will be some time before everything is transitioned over to MySQL, but it still makes me sad. I just need to be working - ya know?
April 27, 2012 at 5:05 am
Just a different technology set. Go for it.
And, if there isn't a MySqlServerCentral, you get to go and create it. Although you might want to change the name.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
April 27, 2012 at 5:11 am
I wonder what kind of background the lead decision makers at your company have to suggest this? I too have heard rumblings of such things....(switching from SQL to MySQL)
In the end, i just shrug my shoulders and say "Good luck finding a MySQL admin"
April 27, 2012 at 7:40 am
I've recently had to work with some MySQL databases and I think the core engine is fine (although the optimiser is very simplistic, so it's better for basic CRUD than complex BI etc.) and it can scale quite well.
The enterprise managability is light years behind MS SQL and Oracle though. Backups and recovery options are poor and require much more DBA involvement, there's nothing anywhere near as nice to develop in as SSMS (especially combined with SQL Prompt) and some of the decisions in the default (innoDB) storage engine leave a lot to be desired (I had the misfortune of adding a nullable column to a 120 million row table the other day :crying:)
April 27, 2012 at 9:50 am
Enjoy, and view it as an opportunity. I did a little MySQL work years ago, and it was fine. Works well as a base engine, some differences, but it's the chance to learn something new.
And you might find they come back. Lots of stuff in SQL Server that works better than what you build in other platforms, and at much less effort.
April 27, 2012 at 11:42 am
Thanks for all the encouragement gang...I believe the ultimate decision to go with MySQL over staying with MS SQL was due to the main listener interface here at the company. It runs with Mongo and distributes its incoming traffic currently to both the MySQL environemnt, and SQL Server. I don't know if they realize the difference in BI power between the 2 or not, nor if they intend on keeping some presence of MS SQL around, but they have been using 'Grails' to do their dev work for new releases and systems, and so all this is pointing away from .NET, and towards a more open source type of shop.
I dunno - we'll see what happens. I am simply a contractor at this point, but there was a discuss between myself and the HR director yesterday asking me if I thought I would be interested in working more intensely with MySQL. I truly believe I would enjoy doing it, but I do not want to leave MS SQL behind (for that is where my heart is at!)
🙂
April 27, 2012 at 12:32 pm
From a distribution and load sharing perspective, apparently MySQL blows MS SQL Server out of the water, at least according to a few dual admins I know and one I work with.
MySQL has a lot going for it and the engine is reasonably powerful. MS SQL Server does things a bit differently with T-SQL and the wrappers and the like, but its real bonus is in all the 'free add-ons'. Otherwise, as long as you know what's going on in that specific engine and the specific quirks of it, they can all (basically) keep up with each other.
Ignoring RAC. I really don't want to get in an Oracle vs. SQL debate, it's never good for my blood pressure. They're all pretty useful though.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply