Re: (slightly OT) postgresql? firebird? mysql?

[Perrin Harkins <pe...@elem.com>]

On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 21:23 +0100, Daniel McBrearty wrote:
> I'm currently using mysql, but I'm considering changing over to
> firebird or postgre.
> 
> Anyone have any reasoned loves/hates/useful experiences to pass on?

If you aren't already using InnoDB tables in MySQL, try that first.  It
may save you the trouble of porting to PostgreSQL.  (Nothing against Pg,
but why port if you don't have to?)  The transaction and replication
support for InnoDB tables is good, and the locking system works on the
same principles as the PostgreSQL one.  With MySQL 5, you can also get
rid of some annoying MySQLisms (like inserting default values into NOT
NULL columns when passed a NULL) by turning on strict mode.

- Perrin

Re: (slightly OT) postgresql? firebird? mysql?

[Jonathan Vanasco <jo...@2xlp.com>]

To add-

Make sure you migrate ALL tables AND your default  table type (ie db  
type) from MyISAM to innodb

ONLY innodb tables are transaction safe.  If you have a multi-table  
transaction where 1 table is not inno, you'll go crazy trying to  
figure out why all your rollbacks seem to corrupt your database.

On Mar 1, 2006, at 4:38 PM, Perrin Harkins wrote:

> If you aren't already using InnoDB tables in MySQL, try that  
> first.  It
> may save you the trouble of porting to PostgreSQL.  (Nothing  
> against Pg,
> but why port if you don't have to?)  The transaction and replication