Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 8 Dec 1997 11:54:58 -0700 (MST)
From:      Atipa <freebsd@atipa.com>
To:        Robin Melville <robmel@nadt.org.uk>
Cc:        Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Best SQL was: Re: PostgreSQL for Yellow Pages
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.91.971205224734.25378A-100000@dot.ishiboo.com>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19971121182225.007db8d0@wrcmail>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

I have had to do this research myself recently. Here is what I found:

1) msql - really slow and featureless, but easy to use and has a good
	user base.

2) MySQL - really fast and featureless, with fairly good user base. They
	sacrifice lots of usability for speed enhancements (no rollbacks,
	views, etc.), and I am not really convinced how stable it is.
	Relies on threads (good performance; possible maintenance nightmare)

3) PostgreSQL - Slow but featurefull and well supported. I heard the next
	version will be lots faster. Good user base. Has been around a _long_
	time.

What I ended usign was...

4) Kubl - Linux binary, but runs ok (so far) in emulation. Commercial
	($199 for devlopment libs + unlimited users), but is very
	fast, and feature rich. It's native API is ODBC, so I feel good
	about portable code that is not too slow. It also has an interactive
	client that interprets SQL/OBDC scripts. I have been VERY pleased
	so far. Fast, full-featured, and so far stable. www.kubl.com

Kevin


> >> Dear Sir / Madam,
> >> 
> >> 	Please do bear withme since I do not know the best approach to present
> >> you with my immediate need to implement PostgreSQL.
> 
> >> 	3. Do you think that PostgreSQL is the right product for such a project?
> >
> >Yes I think so.

> 
> You might also think about "mysql". It rather depends how much data you are
> planning to handle. If small amounts, and speed is not an issue, postgresql
> is fine... if large then try mysql -- it has far less features but is much
> quicker and seems more robust. I recently stress-tested them both and
> discovered that 250,000 updates on postgresql took 1 hour 10 minutes, on
> Mysql just 9 minutes. Simple joined selects on the trial database were at
> least 3 times quicker on mysql than on pgress (which also ran out of memory
> sometimes).
> 
> A further possibility is "msql" which has a tiny subset of SQL
> functionality but is well supported for web access. A reasonably fully
> featured commercial alternative which works well on FreeBSD is Yard
> (http://www.yard.de/).
> 
> Regards
> 
> Robin.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Robin Melville, Addiction & Forensic Information Service
> Nottingham Alcohol & Drug Team (Extn. 49178)
> Vox: +44 (0)115 952 9478  Fax: +44 (0)115 952 9421 
> Email: robmel@nadt.org.uk
> WWW:   http://www.innotts.co.uk/nadt/
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.971205224734.25378A-100000>