Database Front end suggestion

[Alma J Wetzker]

Tim Wunder wrote:
> On 11/10/2004 7:20 AM, I believe that David Bandel wrote:
> 
>> 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).
>>
> 
> Can you please clarify this claim? According to the mysql website, mysql 
> with InnoDB is ACID compliant:
> http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/ANSI_diff_Transactions.html
> 
> So it would seem the general statement that mysql is not ACID compliant 
> would be wrong. Mysql using the InnoDB storage engine is ACID compliant, 
> but mysql using the MyISAM storage engine (which, I suppose, is the 
> default) is not.
> 
> But... I reserve the right to be completely clueless regarding ACID 
> compliance and defer to your much broader level of knowledge and 
> experience WRT databases.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 
> <snip Postgresql acidity...>

I was aware of that clause.  I tried InnoDB.  It was slower and more complex 
to setup.  My opinion would be that MySQL has a pH of 6.5 and PostgreSQL has a 
pH closer to 3.  Both are still ACID.  One wraps up the complexities imposed 
by ACID and exposes the admin tools as normal, no big deal (PostgreSQL).  The 
other makes you take care of additional minutia of configuration and 
administration to obtain ACID (MySQL).  DISCLAIMER:  I have not looked at 
versions of MySQL more recent than 4.0.

     -- Alma