Making The Switch

  • If only there was a tool like Enterprise Manager or SSIS for linux (no. not in a vmware setting) then DBA's could switch to linux easily.

    Quest's Toad for SQL Server would be a great tool to have ported over but I don't think anyone will do that. Why? Linux doesn't care about MS SQL, they'll tell to convert to MySQL.

    Just my 2 cent worth

    Rudy

  • That's one of the (MANY!) problems with the *nix community.  Rabidly anti-MS, rabidly Not Invented Here.  MySQL is a very good product and it is improving and evolving all the time, but as far as I can tell it's not the all-in-one solution that SQL Server is.  It doesn't come with a GUI for administration (seperate download and installation), I don't think it has an all-in-one data store where your SPs and Views are stored with your data objects, etc.  It's certainly not as straightforward an install as SQL Server.  I believe that they've added views, but I have no idea if they've got native stored procedures or if you have to throw together some perl code to do the equivalent.

    That being said, I do need to start working with MySQL.  I've been studying PHP/MySQL and need to get that running to better apply what I'm learning.  Perl is then next on my list, unfortunately followed by Java.

    -----
    [font="Arial"]Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves or we know where we can find information upon it. --Samuel Johnson[/font]

  • I've been using SQL Server with PHP for many years.  Look at ADODB by John Lim http://phplens.com/phpeverywhere

    I've used MySQL on projects too.  No real stored procedures yet.  All the tools that you need can be downloaded from them too.  There are better (not free) tools out there. 

    ATBCharles Kincaid

  • I still think that MySQL is immature at best. If you need to free DBMS platform then go with PostgreSQL.

    Do keep in mind that these benefits come at the cost of additional overhead for the database server to perform the necessary checks. Additional checking by the server affects performance, which for some applications may be sufficiently undesirable as to be avoided if possible. (Some major commercial applications have coded the foreign key logic at the application level for this reason.)

    MySQL gives database developers the choice of which approach to use. If you don't need foreign keys and want to avoid the overhead associated with enforcing referential integrity, you can choose another storage engine instead, such as MyISAM. (For example, the MyISAM storage engine offers very fast performance for applications that perform only INSERT and SELECT operations. In this case, the table has no holes in the middle and the inserts can be performed concurrently with retrievals. See Section 7.3.3, "Concurrent Inserts".)

    -- MySQL 5.0 Reference Manual - Section 1.9.5.5. "Foreign Keys"

    If your DBMS can't outperform application level logic for data consistency checking then it's time to look elsewhere. Also, the choice between performance and data integrity is a business decision and not a developer decision. In 99.999% of the cases (maybe more) the business will pony up the extra funds to improve the hardware under the DBMS. SQL Server and Oracle are near-linearly scalable so you're going to get the most from you hardware dollar (or pound sterling, peso, etc.). I am not sure about PostgreSQL on the scalability but I bet it's pretty good.

    MySQL is well marketed but PostgreSQL is a better product.

    [font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
    Business Intelligence Administrator
    MSBI Administration Blog

  • MySQL scales and I actually like the architecture. Different storage engines can be swapped in. I'd never run without the transaction and PK/FK checks, but maybe you'd want them. What about a serise of read-only servers that get replicated out from a write server?

  • What about a series of read-only servers that get replicated out from a write server? -- Steve Jones

    That would be OK, as long as the source database has foreign keys to make sure the is accurate. I also don't have a problem with disabling keys during mass data loads but they should be enabled again when the load is finished.

    [font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
    Business Intelligence Administrator
    MSBI Administration Blog

Viewing 6 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply