Re^5: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees) by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Jul 11, 2008 at 02:55 UTC
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: Does it work? Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?	[reply]
Re^6: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees) by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jul 11, 2008 at 00:47 UTC
And we know what good judgement they have. They dumped Perl for PHP after all.	[reply]
Re^7: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees) by perrin (Chancellor) on Jul 11, 2008 at 00:56 UTC
They still use tons of Perl. They just don't use it for front-end page delivery.	[reply]
Re^8: [OT] Why I don't use Mysql for new projects (Yahoo agrees) by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jul 11, 2008 at 03:19 UTC
I know, I was just playing for effect. :)	[reply]