Open Source Week!
-
Or maybe couple weeks. MySQL 5 has arrived as well as Postgres 8.1. Postgres was the same week as SQL Server 2005 and MySQL the week before. While I'm not sure that I really think either of these is a better product than Oracle or SQL Server, or that it is really that much less expensive, they are worthy, capable products in many cases.
On the Windows platform, especially in a situation where you already have SQL Server, have staffed trained, or at least familiar, I don't think either of these is a good switch. Especially with all the additions you have in SQL Server, Integration Services/DTS, Reporting Services, AD integration, etc. It's a tight package that is hard to beat. Even if it costs you $20k for licenses (server + client), how much $$ would you spend retraining, getting people familiar, and dealing with mistakes as they learn? I'd bet $$$$.
In the *nix world, however, with Oracle even more expensive and a similar product, it might make some more sense to switch. I've felt PostgreSQL was the more advanced product and 8.1 has added many more features that make it more competitive with the big 3. MySQL, however, seemed to me to be a toy database. Capable of working in many environments and supporting large loads, but still lacking many features that I've used in my database past. Version 5, however, might be worth looking at.
Now that this toddler has left the training pants and pulled up the big boy underwear and included triggers and stored procedures.
Steve Jones
-
I am not sure that I neccessarily agree with your entire post (though I must admit as a linux guy that in fact some of this post is accurate). Though I believe you are correct in your last statement (the one about "todler has left the training pants") I think you should clarify. As far as I know, Postgres has had stored procedures for some time. The other thing is that neither of these products is exceptionally difficult to install, maintain or work with. Both servers support sql, and beyond some basic changes in how you add users, manage the servers, perform backups, etc. there really isn't THAT much of a learning curve. I would say that you could train an entire staff for much less than $20,000. Both servers have regular windows installers, both servers have suites of management tools that are specifically designed to look and feel like sql server. I would say that a good dba or programmer could pick up either one in a weekend. But thats just me, I haven't really done a lot of research on the topic, I just know about my own experiences with both servers.
Although I love both of them, MySQL seems to be much easier to use, but thats just me.
Thanks,
Aleksei
-
I would agree with Alexsei concerning training/retraining. Using the appropriate tools will further lessen the learning curve. (The EMS products come to mind).
Also, when you are dealing with many clients then $20000 is not accurate at all. Per Processor cost for SQL Server (and Oracle) means that unless you are going to really use some of these fancy features, the cost becomes prohibitive. Given the nature of the product and the BSD license, Postgresql is a very attractive choice.
Any commercial use of MySQL with closed source software is subject to a commercial license, which carries a cost. IIRC, this cost is under $500/server. This is way less than any of the big three.
-
This is off topic but I feel I must say this: I have enjoyed reading your editorials for some time, but one thing REALLY irritates me about the editorials. In fact I am actually considering unsubscribing because of it. Frequently the articles will end with a paragraph like this:
"Now that this toddler has left the training pants and pulled up the big boy underwear and included triggers and stored procedures."
Huh?!
AHHH!!! That is not a sentence!!! It makes no sense on its own. It is painful to read each and every time I encounter it!
Hopefully I am not being too harsh. Please consider this an attempt at constructive criticism. I'm sure I am not the only one who feels this way.
My apologies for the rant...
-
Dan - I couldn't help smiling as I read through your rant...Just as an FYI, here's what I personally do when I'm reading something that is work-related - be it an email from colleagues/managers, technical articles or posts in discussion forums...I "switch off" my "obsessive-compulsive language-sensor" and learn to appreciate the content...Steve's editorials in particular are always content-packed so this is not difficult to do...
Don't know if you read through this great post that was started by Scott a few weeks ago..but if you find time hanging heavy on your hands
, you may want to read it...rant on business communications
**ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI !!!** -
i used postresql for 18 months and loved it. the learning curve is minimal as long as your staff are keen to embrace something that isn't windoze.
totally agree with you about mysql as well about it being a toy database - i wouldn't feel to secure with any business critical data sitting on it. it's a real shame that postgresql didn't take off like mysql in the web arena ans the php integration is just as good.
cheers
dbgeezer
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply