3 ms·

I miss aspects of those days, because I made a good bit of money from people who used MyISAM because "it's more performant" (or just because it was the default,

I miss aspects of those days, because I made a good bit of money from people who used MyISAM because "it's more performant" (or just because it was the default, yes, I'm dating myself here), and then corrupted their data because MyISAM didn't enforce constraints. Other than the easy money, nah, don't miss the old days that much. Having to use Reflector to decompile a core .NET library to figure out wtf it was doing because MSDN was inadequate, and the source was very much not open. PHP 4 code bases that heavily leaned on dangerous globals. J2EE. Ah, the "good" ol days.

dmitriid 4y ago
> who used MyISAM I remember reading "High-Performance MySQL" in mid-200s. It was a real eye-opener: all the things you needed from a DB where somewhat randomly available across the different storage mechanisms, but not in any consistent form. Something like: Oh, you need query optimisation? Use one. You need constraints? Use the other. you need fast indexes? Use the first one again. And so on. > Ah, the "good" ol days. You'll pry my nostalgia from my cold dead hands!
- jagged-chisel 4y ago
  > mid-200s I am astounded to learn MySQL predates so much technological advancement! >.<
  - sdiacom 4y ago
    The code base certainly looks the part.
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    Pretty sure they mean mid-2000’s. So actually MySQL won’t be invented for another 480 years or so.
Aeolun 4y ago
It was all more fun at the time because of those reasons. You didn't need anything more than 'barely adequate' to be at the top of your game.