I was hoping to see analysis of few features and their performance under various constraints.
In the end, felt like click-baited
Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
31–40 of 100 posts
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems like a bit of a false dichotomy. Do the Postgres Devs genuinely see having a bug tracker as a "bad thing"? Or are they just stuck in their ways at this point? A mailing list hardly seems like an efficient method for tracking bugs unless a major part of the efficiency is reducing signal to noise by make it more difficult for non-developer or non-paying users to file bugs
Well, it was not really meant entirely seriously, of course. I can't speak for other devs contributing to the project, but I think the mailing list is a great way to do this. Ultimately, what you want is a simple way to track information about reported issues, discuss the details, make it reasonably simple to search for existing issues, and post patches fixing the issue. A mailing list does all of that, without havin…
A good bug tracker makes it easier to track status and priority. The ironic thing about the blog post is that it is certainly possible there is a 14.5 year old bug in Postgres, but how would you know? Who is going to go look at 14.5 year old bug report emails and try to figure out if any of them are still open?
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#332017 and my dude still trying to sell consulting by applying the old emacs vs vim strategy. I usually defer to facebook using thousands of mysql and other big companies using way more instances of pgsql for day to day advice. Maybe next time, with a better blog or a matrix with some effective info noting the experience you guys have managing/developing against it. Also the patch for MySQL would be appreciated, why it did took you so long ? xoxox
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t innodb atleast enforce those constraints?
During most normal operations such as updates, inserts and deletes it will enforce them. But, opposed to other databases, you are allowed to completely ignore your foreign key constraints leaving you with a (in my opinion) possibly corrupt database. SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 0; INSERT INTO ... SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 1; Now you might have data in your database that's actually incorrect.
You can do this in postgres as well, with something like:
begin; alter table t2 disable trigger all;
insert into t2 (t1_id) values (20);
alter table t2 enable trigger all;
commit;
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/sql-set-constrain...
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn’t innodb atleast enforce those constraints?
During most normal operations such as updates, inserts and deletes it will enforce them. But, opposed to other databases, you are allowed to completely ignore your foreign key constraints leaving you with a (in my opinion) possibly corrupt database. SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 0; INSERT INTO ... SET FOREIGN_KEY_CHECKS = 1; Now you might have data in your database that's actually incorrect.
PostgreSQL has the same feature actually, which I learned as part of a MySQL -> PostgreSQL migration that's underway.
SET session_replication_role TO 'replica';
And we'll all try and forget this feature exists when we're done!
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#36> If you use PostgreSQL in the cloud or from a services company, make sure you ask them what they have contributed to PostgreSQL and what their capability is to fix bugs and with what SLA. The answer to that question is what keeps open source well funded for these latest developments and future ones too.
Reasonable sounding theory. How true is it, how significant?
Does that story describe how 2ndquadrant gets business -- other vendors have customers asking for an SLA on PostgreSQL fixes, which would require PostgreSQL experts to meet?
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#37I'm curious about the strategic thinking behind a post like this. I'd think that the serious money that can be gained by taking marketshare from another database for a company like 2ndquadrant would be in businesses using (or contemplating) Oracle Database, not Oracle (or some version of) MySQL.
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#38I'm a huge Postgres fan and yes I'm probably biased towards it. I do think it's probably the best open source database out there, but I also don't love these types of posts. What makes something better than another things is a whole host of things, not just highlighting one really bad case from the other side. I'm sure if the MySQL world wanted they could point out ways that MySQL is so much better than Postgres. Jus…
I remember ages ago (a decade? or so?) I started working at a company using Postgres for a project, and one of the things my boss asked me to do was to set up replication for the database. We had it on all of our MySQL databases, and everyone knew (myself included) that Postgres was a more serious, enterprise-y, "real" database.
Well, I googled around and couldn't find anything conclusive, so I hopped into the / channel for postgres and asked about it. "Is there any straightforward replication solutions for Postgres?"
It was like the early days of open source all over again. The first thing they did was challenge my needs. "Why do you need replication in the first place?" "Replication isn't a panacea you know." "Postgres doesn't have the issues that MySQL does that makes replication necessary." "Replication doesn't work well in the first place."
A ton of people jumped into what had been a quiet channel to make sure I knew that replication, which postgres didn't have, was something I didn't need in the first place, most of which happened before they even knew why I was asking.
After sorting through all that, a few people suggested "solutions". "Just have a cronjob rsync your data directory over to another machine every minute, and if your first server dies then you can just start postgres on the second one." Other solutions were much more convoluted. Patch postgres, add this software, manage it all yourself. And through it all, they kept telling me that I didn't need replication anyway, "but if you INSIST…".
In comparison, the MySQL channel on freenode was staffed with MySQL employees and volunteers who were always happy to help you solve your problem while teaching you what you were missing and giving you resources you needed. They'd answer questions, help your configuration, and even fix your SQL queries for you, all without being condescending about it or making you feel like an idiot.
And that's why I gave up on Postgres: the community. Postgres's was ridiculously hostile and self-important, verging on insecure and defensive. MySQL's was helpful, friendly, and full of resources. To this day I still hear great things about postgres, and I know it does a lot of things better than MySQL, but whenever someone writes a self-superior blog post about it I always think back to how much easier my life was by using a database where I could ask questions of the community and get useful answers.
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#39I'm a huge Postgres fan and yes I'm probably biased towards it. I do think it's probably the best open source database out there, but I also don't love these types of posts. What makes something better than another things is a whole host of things, not just highlighting one really bad case from the other side. I'm sure if the MySQL world wanted they could point out ways that MySQL is so much better than Postgres. Jus…
I remember ages ago (a decade? or so?) I started working at a company using Postgres for a project, and one of the things my boss asked me to do was to set up replication for the database. We had it on all of our MySQL databases, and everyone knew (myself included) that Postgres was a more serious, enterprise-y, "real" database. Well, I googled around and couldn't find anything conclusive, so I hopped into the / chan…
Meh. It works both ways. There was a time if you asked for transactions on MySQL...
Re: Why PostgreSQL is better than MySQL
#40I'm a huge Postgres fan and yes I'm probably biased towards it. I do think it's probably the best open source database out there, but I also don't love these types of posts. What makes something better than another things is a whole host of things, not just highlighting one really bad case from the other side. I'm sure if the MySQL world wanted they could point out ways that MySQL is so much better than Postgres. Jus…
Just look back at how long it too for us to get upsert, we're finally getting a better replication story in recent years.
Coincidentally, using those two features together on MySQL can have fun results:
"Because the results of INSERT ... SELECT statements depend on the ordering of rows from the SELECT and this order cannot always be guaranteed, it is possible when logging INSERT ... SELECT ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE statements for the master and the slave to diverge. (...) An INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE statement against a table having more than one unique or primary key is also marked as unsafe. (Bug #11765650, Bug #58637)."
https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/insert-on-duplicate....