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

Banks will all be running Oracle or Sybase. None of us are building banking applications with open source databases. However, Yahoo uses MySQL for stock market data, and users would certainly care if that data was wrong.

Also, Google released patches for InnoDB, which makes it pretty clear they aren't just using replicated MyISAM tables.

  • Comment on Re^4: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees)
by erix (Prior) on Jul 11, 2008 at 00:39 UTC
[reply]
      Having done some consulting for Yahoo, they have some freaking brilliant people. It also means that they tend to pick the best tool for the job. MySQL doesn't scale to 2 petabytes ... apparently neither does Oracle. Which means what? That a 2 petabyte database handling 1M events/hour requires something extremely specialized. That specialization generally requires a couple developers who know a codebase really really well. That could just as easily have been a new MySQL engine.

      MySQL was used as the platform for Kickfire, SQL on a chip. $800M in VC funding from Sun and other players. They have a bad idea?

      I'm not saying one's better than the other. They have different benefits and different drawbacks.

      My criteria for good software:
      1. Does it work?
      2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
[reply]

      And we know what good judgement they have. They dumped Perl for PHP after all.

[reply]
        They still use tons of Perl. They just don't use it for front-end page delivery.
[reply]

In Section Meditations