Re^3: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

I'm reading your concerns and your response to perrin as "he doesn't understand its architecture."

Now, you have very valid points with regards to MySQL's suitability for certain tasks. Oracle is still the gold standard for a reason (and it's not its pricepoint!). That said, MySQL is suitable for most tasks, assuming you set certain defaults appropriately. I don't ever do anything unless it's in InnoDB or NDB (if I need clustering). I always use the strictest sql mode and I set all my charsets to Unicode or Latin-1 (depending). There are certain features I will never use and certain features I don't consider optional. Same as my thoughts on Oracle, Sybase, and DB2. Oracle's defaults suck horribly. There isn't a single Oracle DBA that would ever consider using them. Does that make Oracle a bad RDBMS?

My criteria for good software:

Does it work?
Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?

Comment on Re^3: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects by moritz (Cardinal) on Jul 10, 2008 at 19:59 UTC
I'm reading your concerns and your response to perrin as "he doesn't understand its architecture." Ok, I got that wrong. Thanks for clarifying. DB2. Oracle's defaults suck horribly. There isn't a single Oracle DBA that would ever consider using them. Does that make Oracle a bad RDBMS? Worse than it could be. But there is a huge difference in how mysql and oracle are perceived in the public. Everybody recommends mysql for beginners (with good reason - it's easier to use at first than most alternatives), so IMHO it's more important to have good defaults, because beginners are the ones who don't touch the settings. Nobody really uses an Oracle DB just to install a web counter in PHP. If you're a beginner with databases and forced to use Oracle, you'll probably not administer it at first. That's more a marketing distinction than a technical one, but you can't view these things out of context.	[reply]
Re^5: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects by chromatic (Archbishop) on Jul 10, 2008 at 22:01 UTC
IMHO it's more important to have good defaults, because beginners are the once who don't touch the settings. Great point; MySQL would be a better database in general if its defaults were better. (The concern not to break databases on upgrade is valid, but I'm not a fan of backwards compatibility in general.)	[reply]
Re^5: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Jul 10, 2008 at 22:58 UTC
It's not a marketing decision at all. It's a business decision - "Our target market is beginners." Now, I'm going to disagree with you that their decisions have been bad ones. In fact, I'm willing to go on record as saying that MyISAM is an excellent engine for beginners. There is very little administration required and its defaults are extremely well-chosen, even those brought forward due to backwards compatibility. Plus, it's well-optimized for the types of queries that beginners tend to make (such as SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table1). Now, it sucks when stuff goes wrong. That sort of thing is what you need experts for. Experts, in general, will want to customize. All of a sudden, defaults matter less and less. See the progression? My criteria for good software: Does it work? Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?	[reply]