9 ms·
ms sql is better than mysql. downvote me all you want, but you can't possibly disagree if you've tried both like I have. transaction isolation anyone? don't h
by TheOsiris 11y ago
ms sql is better than mysql. downvote me all you want, but you can't possibly disagree if you've tried both like I have. transaction isolation anyone?
don't have much experience with postgres, but my money is still on mssql
- jimktrains2 11y agoPostgreSQL is pretty amazing. MySQL isn't even in the same league as PostgreSQL. I'm sure MSSQL is nice, but my money is on PostgreSQL being even nicer. http://www.pg-versus-ms.com/ http://www.pg-versus-ms.com/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2mhpwp/postgresql_vs_ms_sql_server_a_comparison_of_two/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/2mhpwp/postgre... MySQL is hardly a relational database, it's not quite the benchmark you're looking for.
- jpgvm 11y agoThis precisely. MySQL has made headway in recent years but is still miles behind PostgreSQL. No commercial database is in the same league when it comes down to it either. Oracle has some nice stuff that PG doesn't have yet but PG is still the nicer database overall.
- cptskippy 11y agoWhat metric are you using to compare databases? It sounds like you're saying MySQL, while crap, is better than commercial databases.
- wtetzner 11y agoI read it as saying Postgres is better than commercial databases.
- jpgvm 11y agoOther gentleman is correct. The tier list is pretty simple. MySQL < MSSQL < Oracle < PostgreSQL. Basically PostgreSQL is king of relational databases right now.
- ismail 11y agoWhy?
- ktRolster 11y agoFree + Fast + no weird syntax (like Oracle) + Most features (although I think Oracle replication might still be better)
- jsmeaton 11y agoOracle replication usually requires Golden Gate to the best of my knowledge. Someone was telling me the other day they hacked their own system together with shell scripts (ship and restore log files using scp etc), but that's probably not something you'd want to build your business on. So yes, Oracle replication is probably better if you use Golden Gate. But Golden Gate is pretty expensive (17k per CPU?).
- cptskippy 11y agoI'm still unclear under what criteria Oracle comes out on top of MSSQL. Aside from the extreme high end, I can't think of a circumstance where I'd prefer using Oracle to MSSQL.
- lololomg 11y agoMSSQL < Oracle? No way. Maybe Postgre is nicer than MSSQL for you. I don't know. But Oracle? Oracle is worse than MSSQL in just about every way that matters.
- TheLogothete 11y agoThat first link has been discussed many times on HN and the consensus always is that the author is extremely ignorant.
- qjighap 11y agoHe acknowledges his crassness at the bottom. Unfortunately, sometimes ignorant people have a point. Native regular expression support is a big deal, if it balances towards a better platform is another question.
- brobinson 11y agoFor MySQL vs PostgreSQL, I link people to this one: http://grimoire.ca/mysql/choose-something-else http://grimoire.ca/mysql/choose-something-else
- cptskippy 11y agoI'm sure MSSQL is nice, but my money is on PostgreSQL being even nicer. Having used both, I'd take that bet. MSSQL is in my opinion the best DB out there in terms of ease of use, documentation, integration, and tools. PostgreSQL is a distant second, and SQLite is probably a distant 3rd (though it's really not in the same category).
- jimktrains2 11y ago> documentation The pg documentation is quite through and informative. > integration Meaning? "Integration" in and of itself is meaningless because that depends on what we're integrating with. Rust integration? pg is much better. Some obscure windows-only business tool that most people have never heard of? well, it integrates with what they want it to (probably mssql). Some obscure BSD-only business tool that most people have never heard of? well, it integrates with what they want it to (probably pg or mysql). > tools Again, meaningless unless you discuss what the actual differences are. Being able to be used on BSD makes pg infinitely superior in terms of tooling for my cost function.
- jamespo 11y agoTell me of these BSD-only business tools
- mozumder 11y agoDoes MS-SQL have anything like PostGres' Bidirectional replication? Also, Postgres is missing multiple result sets, which Sql Server seems to have, right?
- dsp1234 11y agoDoes MS-SQL have anything like PostGres' Bidirectional replication? Yes. https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151196.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151196.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151855.aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms151855.aspx
- brazzledazzle 11y agoMicrosoft's HA and replication user experience is light years ahead of PostgreSQL's from an operations perspective last time I checked.
- Grazester 11y agoWhat a ridiculous statement to make!
- sqldba 11y agoSS is more advanced than PG out of the box. Built in scalability and HA; far more reliable point in time backup/restore; PG even only had a plan cache added recently (the past year or so?) Then you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures. That's not counting all the non engine stuff. There is no adequate free software equivalent to reporting services or analysis services. Sorry PG isn't even close. PG is no doubt extremely important and the best of the free software pack. And you will pay your life to MS for adequate licensing. But there really is no comparison. MySQL on the other hand is a flat out joke.
- adwf 11y ago> Then you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures. Err, Postgres has full text search, columnstores and native procedures. Memory tables is slightly different, but doable. It's an open source project with extensions, you can't just classify it by the core.
- philliphaydon 11y agoLets not forget proper JSONB support. Oh god it's the most amazing thing to ever happen to a relational database.
- olavgg 11y ago> far more reliable point in time backup/restore; Hmmm. I use ZFS snapshots for backup of my PostgreSQL instances. It's faster, as reliable as it can be, and I can run a full backup every fifth minute and keep the snapshot history on a database that weights 2TB.
- Jweb_Guru 11y ago> PG even only had a plan cache added recently (the past year or so?) What? You have no idea what you're talking about. > you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures. Postgres has all of these (column stores only available as extensions). I don't think you're very familiar with Postgres.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- masklinn 11y ago> ms sql is better than mysql. That's one hell of a benchmark, up there with "eating paste is better than being on fire" and "missing a hand is better than missing a head". > don't have much experience with postgres, but my money is still on mssql Obviously, since postgres is FOSS.
- kelvin0 11y agoIf you ever become a comedian (unless you're already one) I will gladly shovel money at you to tell me jokes ... I was thinking the same thing, but could not express it as viscerally.
- tehbeard 11y agoCare to serve something more substantial than just a summary of your opinion in a flaming manner? * A list of advantages vs mysql? (Bonus if you can admit faults of MSSQL as well) * Some blogs or articles perchance? * Performance metrics or % of SQL standard it implements vs the accused? I'm genuinely curious if it is good but one half-screamed pledge is hardly trustworthy.
- meritt 11y agoinnodb has four levels of ACID-compliant transaction isolation. what's your complaint?
- icebraining 11y agoAre ALTER TABLEs transactional yet?
- matwood 11y agoMySql is a joke and always has been. I blame a huge majority of the RDBMS hate on the fact that many peoples only experience with a RDBMS was MySql. The issues are numerous, but two of my personal favorites are silent data truncation and allowing 'indeterminate' results with non-aggregate or non-functionally dependent columns in the select[1]. 5.7.5 finally changes the default behavior of the former. This site lists many of the issues: http://grimoire.ca/mysql/choose-something-else http://grimoire.ca/mysql/choose-something-else [1] http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/group-by-handling.html http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/group-by-handling.htm...
- codedokode 11y agoThere would be no data truncation if you enable strict mode (sql_mode = 'STRICT_ALL_TABLES'). Indeterminate results appear only if the column values in a group are different. SQL standart doesn't allow such selects at all (even if the values in the group are the same) so you have to write longer queries. MySQL is not that bad, it was used in facebook and wikipedia.
- rosser 11y ago> ms sql is better than mysql. Well, gosh. I'm convinced. (Full disclosure: I abhor MySQL. But if you're paying attention, you'll notice that my position is a statement of opinion, while yours is a statement of "fact". The reality is, every RDBMS has strengths and weaknesses, and should be evaluated for their applicability to a given project on a case-by-case basis — at which point, I'm sure, you'll conclude that PostgreSQL is the best choice, anyway.) ;)
- TheOsiris 11y agoThe thing is I wasn't trying to convince anyone though :) I doubt anyone here will be willing to shell out the money for a license. Although, Azure might make it affordable but I hated the limitations they put on the mssql instances (can't remember them rn). My biggest problem with myssql is that it is very immature. Biggest problems I have with it are (right now, b/c that's what I'm facing atm): transaction isolation and stored procedures. I'm pretty sure pg has the same lame transaction isolation issues as well.
- vertex-four 11y agoWhat do you mean Postgres has tx isolation issues? The entire point of preferring it over mySQL is that it does most things around that area properly.
- TheOsiris 11y agonot from my experience. last I checked, neither one of them supports nested transactions
- rosser 11y agoWhatever transaction isolation issues PostgreSQL might have, I guarantee you it doesn't have the "same lame" ones as MySQL. As just one example: "range locking". Look it up.
- TheOsiris 11y ago
- LesZedCB 11y agoI mean, i think most people might agree. it's the pricing that's pretty different though. :)
- TheOsiris 11y agosure, and I've never used mssql for any project of mine b/c it is so expensive. I've only used it when someone else (a client) pays for it. That still doesn't make it functionally worse though. I find mysql to be very immature: transaction isolation is a joke, stored procedures are a joke... etc.
- jnevill 11y agoI will agree with you on that one, but one is free and the other isn't. Postgres, however, is free and blows MySQL out of the water. Each has their pros and cons though.
- NicoJuicy 11y agoSQL Express is free, but limited :)
- ktRolster 11y agoI agree it is better than MySQL, but you pay for it. Using MS SQL has heavy licensing fees. PostGreSQL kicks both of them into the trash.
- tracker1 11y agoOkay... now setup a cluster of three pgsql servers with automatic failover... your options are to become very intimate with your dbms, and now pick from half a dozen poorly implemented solutions, or pay licensing costs to EnterpriseDB close to the same costs of MS-SQL, where you get to click a few buttons and your db is clustered. It is a very big deal... and an area Posgres is sorely lacking, but progress is made, and in another 2 releases may catch up to MS-SQL 2005. I love what pg offers for dev, but it really isn't enough from the operations side. That said, I'd be more inclined to reach for RethinkDB for most situations these days, if it were up to me.
- rpgmaker 11y agoI have used both and I agree. Obviously, you still wouldn't want to use MSSQL for personal projects but technically it is years ahead of MySQL that's for sure. My main OS is Linux, fwiw.
- tracker1 11y agoIf I were hosting something on azure (have a smallest windows vm running for some old personal stuff), I would consider it... SQL Express is pretty functional, and the Azure SQL option is nice enough... I've been leaning towards nosql options for a while though... imho RethinkDB is one of the nicer options out there for most use cases... ElasticSearch and Cassandra are also great options depending on your needs.