Re: mySQL 5
Re: mySQL 5
- Subject: Re: mySQL 5
- From: Simon McLean <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 14:23:37 +0000
I've often heard that MySQL is complicated to administer, but I've
never understood where that opinion came from. Maybe it stems from
older versions of MySQL, or maybe people are just referring to
replication and clusters which don't have a GUI. Anyway, for the
record, MySQL itself (clusters and replication aside) is really easy
to administer - just as easy as openbase - double click to install
and hey presto, it's running.
I've never used clusters in production, so don't know much about them
other than that the hardware requirements are pretty extensive (lots
of RAM required because they hold the entire DB in memory) and the
set-up is command line based.
I would also urge you to look at replication as an easier
alternative. It's command line based, but dead easy. Kieran has an
post on his blog about how to set it up.
Why the switch from openbase ? Many reasons. When we made the switch
Openbase were charging for all their licenses and the base license
for our requirements far out-weighed MySQL's licenses. Performance
differential was negligible (again, for our requirements). Another
key reason was the size of the community - we rarely use MySQL's
commercial support because the community support is so good. Now
there is stuff like the Monitoring and Advisory service which is just
brilliant.
There was also one technical bug-bear we had with openbase. From time
to time it didn't shut down properly, or maybe a server fell over,
either way when openbase started up it used to go through some table
checking process that would take a couple of hours because of the
size of our database. It didn't happen often but it killed us when it
did. This was a few years back so it's probably fixed or improved by
now, but I can still remember the pain!
If I were in your shoes I would definitely look at Openbase and
MySQL, but also Frontbase and Postgres which both seem to have quite
fan base. I don't think you can go far wrong with any of them.
Simon
On 14 Feb 2008, at 13:53, Daniel Brajkovic wrote:
I'm curious as to why you moved from openbase. MySQL seems more
complicated to administer especially regarding clusters and also
seems more expensive if you want any support. I am creating a new
webapp and was planning to use openbase.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 14, 2008, at 5:17 AM, Simon McLean <email@hidden>
wrote:
we use 5 (we didn't upgrade from 4, we moved from openbase). no
problems at all with webobjects.
simon
On 14 Feb 2008, at 11:11, David Griffith wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if anyone that is using mySQL has upgraded from
mySQL 4 to mySQL 5? If so, have you noticed any bugs or
pitfalls? Our hosting service is going to upgrade us soon and I
do remember that after the last upgrade we had some major
problems due to some changes to the data types in mySQL. (i.e. I
remember it was something to do with the new TEXT data type.
Any pointers or notes would be much appreciated.
Kind regards,
David Griffith.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
@mac.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
40brajkovic.com
This email sent to email@hidden
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >mySQL 5 (From: David Griffith <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: mySQL 5 (From: Simon McLean <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: mySQL 5 (From: Daniel Brajkovic <email@hidden>) |