Subject: Re: MySQL usage?
From: Christopher E. Brown (cbrown@woods.net)
Date: Thu Oct 25 2001 - 15:20:27 AKDT
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Arthur Corliss wrote:
>
> Of course, but how a system benchmarks at low connection loads and how it
> benchmarks at high connection loads makes a *world* of difference. Again:
> this *is* real world speed issues, if you're in a high traffic/connection
> environment.
It is not high connection loads, it is the type of querys
involved.
> Perhaps I read your previous e-mail wrong, but I took it as promoting MySQL's
> operation benchmarks as superior to the true RDBMS's like Oracle and Postgres.
> I just wanted to be sure we were on the same sheet of music. Some of the
> reports I've read illustrated that MySQL was fast as hell, but you could
> exceed a threshold in which it bogged down tremendously. Oracle and others
> handle loads above that threshold much better than MySQL, and hence,
> outperform it.
It is still apples and rocks here. If your app requires
certain things you write your app properly to use the type of DB you
need. MySQL will handle extreme loads and complex issues as well as
Oracle while providing the required data protection, *if* your apps
useage fits with the MySQL model.
> > The question is not "Is my truck better than the car?", the
> > question is "What kind of load to I have today?"
>
> Which is what I've said all along. . .
Exactly, the comparison does not really work, for some models,
even high load ones MySQL will outrun Oracle, for others Oracle will
do better. It is a tradeoff of higher overhead for extra abilities.
If you need those things then you need them, if you don't, you don't.
The simple thing being, a high volume logging system, radius back end,
etc... does not need Oracle and will runs 3 - 5 times faster on the
same hardware with MySQL, if you write it correctly. If you *need*
transactions and multiversioning (for example a real time accounting
system that *must* always respond in real time even during complex
updates) then use Oracle, it will be much slower initially, but will
degrade much more gracefully.
As to ACID, it has come a long way in the currect versions, and with
the new transactional tables is nearly there. (IIRC multiversioning
is in the works on a page instead of row basis, all of the benifits of
row bases until you get really granular, without all the overhead).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Thu Oct 25 2001 - 15:48:38 AKDT