From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 20 11:50: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [209.157.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4119150CB for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:50:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id LAA50664; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:49:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 11:49:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199905201849.LAA50664@apollo.backplane.com> To: Dan Moschuk Cc: "Pedro J. Lobo" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Database holywars? References: <19990520125421.A94348@trinsec.com> <19990520144215.E94835@trinsec.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :| ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a :| heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial :| support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it :| adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot :| its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using :| it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database :| for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with :| it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. : :If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB :engine? : :-Dan No, Berkeley DB doesn't have much to do with anything. Postgres or MySql are both good choices. Postgres has many more features but is also much bulkier. MySql is slim and fast, but not feature-rich enough to handle realtime operations on complex or large datasets. If the original poster intends to ultimately upgrade to a commercial database, I would probably use Postgres rather then MySql. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message