Re: Open Source Quality

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon May 10 2004 - 11:38:47 CDT

At 11:52 AM -0400 5/10/04, David Mertz wrote:
>>Also Sprach james_in_denver:
>>>For transactional security, and that seems to be a very high priority
>>>for this project, then Postgres would be the better choice. MySQL does
>>>not have any transaction mechanisms.
>On May 10, 2004, at 11:02 AM, Jeff Almeida wrote:
>>This (about MySQL) is old information -- how long ago did you last work
>>with it? MySQL (currently in the 4.1.x line) has supported
>>transaction-capable table types and an ability to turn off auto-commit
>>since early in the 3.23.x releases.
>I was under the impression that PostgreSQL gives you complete
>ACID[*] guarantees, while MySQL still has more limited transactional
>support. Am I wrong in this?
>To Arthur and others: Both Free Software projects have long
>histories of supporting robust, widely-used databases. It's only a
>small exaggeration to say that MySQL is what "runs the web."
>PostgreSQL, in its current incarnation, is a Free Software release
>of a formerly closed, but widely used, RDBMS (formerly called

I used PostgreSQL for teaching database courses at UCSC and we found
it somewhat cranky. MySQL is more robust. ACID is certainly useful.

For the county and statewide systems, it may make sense to use a COTS
database system, because the recovery and backup tools are rather

Best regards,

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:30 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT