Database Front end suggestion

[David Bandel]

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:49:35 -0800, Shawn Tayler <stayler at xmtservices.net> wrote:
> 
> Thanks...  I'll give that a whirl too.
> 
> On a side note,
> 
> Would any of you care to put your $0.02 in on the merits or advantages of
> either postgresql or mysql over the other?

MySQL:  not a true database.  More like a _very_ fast file system you
access with SQL commands.  Great for web logs, but a recipe for
disaster with any application where data integrity is important (like
accounting).
mysql is not ACID.
ACID stands for: Atomicity, Consistency, Integrity, Durability (search
Google, you'll find sites to explain all this in minute detail).

PostgreSQL is ACID.  It has support for transactions,
roll-forward/roll-back, triggers, stored procedures, foreign keys
(very important in a multi-table relational database), and more.  It's
also much easier to maintain.  You can run a vacuum and analyze (along
with a backup) nightly (or more often) to provide the engine "hints"
for faster lookups.

vacuuming in Postgres is important because of the way an ACID database
works (other ACID databases have the same function but with a
different name). updated and deleted rows aren't removed from a
database until you vacuum it (updated rows are really new rows with
the changed data).

The biggest difference between databases is on the admin side. 
Administrative commands are different (although functions are the
same).  But 90% of commands that run on one db will run on another
(exception:  MySQL doesn't support left outer joins you have to run
two natural joins with a union to get the same effect).

Bottom line:  if your data (and its integrity) is important, don't
even consider a toy like MySQL.  Use Postgres, Informix, Oracle (ugh
-- there's a reason Oracle dba's earn 6 digit salaries), or Sybase. 
Firebird may fall into this category too, I've just not looked at it
to see.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
            - Nemesis Air Racing Team motto