5 ms·
I expect better from the front page of HN. I like PostgreSQL and MSSQL Server and to a much lesser degree mySql and Oracle. But in my experience I use the tool
by S_A_P 12y ago
I expect better from the front page of HN. I like PostgreSQL and MSSQL Server and to a much lesser degree mySql and Oracle. But in my experience I use the tool that exists and makes sense for the project. Since most of my work is enterprise its MSSQL or Oracle. For personal projects I used PostgreSQL and got on quite well. None of the tools prevented me from getting the data I needed. There may be scaling issues or use cases that can favor either platform. If so, pick the tool for the job, move on. If you feel compelled to do so, you should document your use case to help others out.
- feld 12y agoIt's very click-baity, but to provide some anecdotal evidence I've never had corrupted data/tables in Postgres, but dealt with it very regularly in MySQL under almost identical environments. MySQL doesn't do a great job of protecting your data compared to Postgres, MSSQL, Oracle, etc.
- feld 12y agoGo ahead, kill -9 your production MySQL servers. I dare you. I can do that to Postgres all day and the on-disk data integrity is preserved.
- kbenson 12y agoIt makes little sense to put it like that, since for MySQL it greatly depends on the storage engine used. I've found InnoDB to be quite robust, but I'm not sure how it compares to what Postgres uses.