2 ms·
Perhaps a better title would have been: "One way in which PostgreSQL is better than MySQL". While I love Postgres, I have to admit that MySQL has its usefulness
by nobleach 9y ago
Perhaps a better title would have been: "One way in which PostgreSQL is better than MySQL". While I love Postgres, I have to admit that MySQL has its usefulness as well. I just did a side project where I started in node and postgres, realized I needed to hand it over to a guy who would want to end up hosting it on some 5 dollar a month PHP-esque plan. So, I bit the bullet, migrated the DB over to MySQL, and rewrote the backend in Laravel/PHP. It'll do just fine for his usage. My alternative was to host it on DigitalOcean, and then become the IT guy.... or perhaps spin up Heroku... but in the end, I just wanted to pass off a package and be done with it. MySQL was dead simple for my use.
- syncsynchalt 9y agoIn my experience writing software with generic SQL support the example shown here highlights something that's endemic in MySQL. MySQL has a bug (eg. #199) or some deficiency (no subselects, no transactions, incorrect utf-8 support)[1]. The community's solution is a workaround (Here's how to restructure your select so that you don't need a subselect. Maybe you could use UUIDs instead of integer keys). Meanwhile the problem never existed in Postgres, which seemed to have been correctly and completely implemented from the start. After several years the issue is fixed in MySQL and the boosters ask that the score be reset and the clock re-started. Postgres has its deficiencies and bugs but other than replication they never seemed core to the product in the way that they were for MySQL. [1] These deficiencies span several decades and might seem unfair to bring up but I want to show that what the article is highlighting is just another round of the same problem.
- icebraining 9y agohttp://www.valcatohosting.com/shared-hosting/ http://www.valcatohosting.com/shared-hosting/