1 Dec
2003
1 Dec
'03
1:27 p.m.
mySQL may be free, and it is an excellent product, but other than in speed
for simple transactions, you can hardly compare them. mySQL does not support
triggers, nested JOINs (as of about 2 months ago), proper foreign keys, nor a
handful of other slightly esoteric but frequently used database methods.
I use mySQL for all my database work. But then, the DB stuff I do is pretty
straight forward, and I rarely need anything more than it offers. I've
messed briefly with postGres, which is verra nice, but was just too different
to make worth switching.
Oracle is expensive. But it's a lot more database than mySQL will be for a
few more years.
--jc
On Monday 01 December 2003 21:53 pm, Jay West wrote:
Sellam;
I wrote a paper for management at one of my clients on exactly this topic,
comparing FreeBSD, Linux, and Windows in one section. Another section
compared Apache vs. IIS. The third section compared MySQL and MSSQL, and
the final section compared ASP vs. PHP.
Note - these comparisons were not in great technical detail, although there
was a lot of technical meat there. The whole paper was focused strictly on
scalability, performance, and reliability. This document was about 1/2 inch
thick most of which was supporting material from third parties (ie. facts).
This paper caused a company that grosses well into 8 digits and employs
many hundreds of people, to get rid of Microsoft from the datacenter, AND
from every persons desktop. I believe I have a copy of this paper still,
and will forward it to you tomorrow when I get to the office if I can find
it quickly before leaving from the NOC. However, I will give the link
http://www.mysql.com/eweek/ as being most illustrative. Note that the link
I gave IS on the Mysql website, but, after reading the synopsis there, note
the link at the bottom of the page which shows the full details of the
study, NOT done by mysql, but eweek. Also interesting to note... MSSQL
leveled off while mysql and oracle were only half way through their
performance curve. Mysql and Oracle had virtually identical performance
curves, and those curves were WELL above the others (MSQL). So, given two
almost identical performance curves... lets see.... MySQL - free. Oracle...
HOW much per seat license??? *GRIN*
Oh, and I'll also throw in here... the person who posted that I was selling
FUD with regards to linux... I wholeheartedly disagree with his stance. I
stand by my arguments and facts, but I'm not going to go back and forth
about it on the list. I voiced my experience, nuff said :)
Jay West
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vintage Computer Festival" <vcf(a)siconic.com>
To: "Classic Computers Mailing List" <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 8:16 PM
Subject: OT: Need resources showing deployments for Linux/Apache/PHP vs.
Windows/ISS/ASP
I have a friend who is a total Microsoft zealot.
We repeatedly get into
annoyingly incredibly pointless arguments over the virtues of Linux
vs. Windows. I mean, I know people have religious OS wars all the time
but he's so ignorant of the Linux world that it's stunning. I mean, the
guy is the smartest person I know, but when it comes to this argument, he
seems to argue for the sake of arguing because he has no real statistics
to go off of and talks completely out of his ass, or he'll quote one
article he read somewhere that said one thing (probably not even what
he's arguing) to justify his position.
For instance, he says PHP is full of holes and is not professional
software because it's written by hobbyists on the side, the language is
not clearly defined, and there's no support for it. He says the same
about MySQL. In fact, this is where the argument tonight started. He
had a web service that crashed because one of his MySQL tables got hosed,
so he blamed all his woes on MySQL (he claims he had to use it because
the programmer he had do the site only new PHP and not ASP which he
would've preferred, claiming that ASP is much more robust, is much better
defined, is way more powerful than PHP, etc., which may all be true but
his criticisms about PHP and MySQL are so unfounded as to be obnoxious).
When I mentioned that MySQL DOES have support (you pay for it just like
you do when you buy MSSQL) he finds some other nit to pick, which I then
shoot down, so he moves on to another, and another, and another, then
starts throwing out dubious statistics, etc.
So I know it's completely pointless, but I just want to throw some
statistics from neutral quarters (i.e. not Linux Journal, but like
Forbes, Fortune, Network Magazine, etc.) showing how many deployments of:
1) Apache running on Linux versus Apache on Windows
2) PHP on Apache vs. ASP on ISS
3) Linux servers vs. Windows servers
4) Growth rates, industry trends, etc.
No matter what I tell him he thinks that there's no way that Linux is
beating MS in any way, shape or form.
As an aside, the extent to which he is completely lost is evident in this
anecdote. He's complaining how people can't code in 64K anymore, and
when I point out that this trend of bloat is pretty much directly
attributable to MS with its programming paradigms and overall bloatiness,
he shoots that down like I was Satan for even suggesting it.
So anyway, I want charts, graphs, hard numbers, quotes, trends, etc. Any
articles that can show the actual numbers of what's going on in the
industry with regards to Linux vs. Windows.
Simple URLs will do.
Thanks for indulging this stupidity.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
----
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business ||
Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage
mputers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at
http://marketplace.vintage.org ]