Re: FN-FORUM: Databases

date posted 4th August 2003 10:51

Richard Parratt [EMAIL REMOVED] wrote:

> So what *do* you suggest! =

> =

> I guess any software is going to have limitations. I'd tend to use MySQ=
L
> until the lack of stored procs, etc. becomes an issue, then move to
> SS2000. (first time I've heard of the transaction limits - got a
> reference?)

PostgreSQL? I prefer it to MySQL simply because it seems better put
together, certainly from an admin perspective.

It can't be that bad, it's running the .org name registry. :)

> Having recently done an Oracle project, I've become even more convinced=

> that its enterprise features (versus SQL Server) are 95% FUD. And the
> tools you get in-the-box are soooo primitive. Worse than MySQL really..=


Oracle is big, heavy, and complex.. thus requires plenty of server and
admin resource to look after it properly.

As for the pricing scheme:

"You need a database, Larry needs a new boat."

-Paul-

-- =

Paul Civati www.xensia.net
Xensia, London UK - Quality UK Hosting Services