Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > ASP .Net > MS SQL or MYSQL

Reply
Thread Tools

MS SQL or MYSQL

 
 
Alvin Bruney
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-15-2003
something like that, thanks for the correction. should have read it again
before posting blindly.

"Andrew de la Harpe" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:#7$(E-Mail Removed)...
> who acquired SAP?
> My understanding is that MySQL agreed to partner with SAP.
>
>
> "Alvin Bruney" <vapordan_spam_me_not@hotmail_no_spamhotmail.com > wrote in
> message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > i would agree that it is a product on a lower scale than ms sql - for

> > now -
> > > but only on a feature by feature basis - speed wise - it's incredibly
> > > impressive.

> >
> > this won't be true for much longer. They just acquired SAP. They're

going
> > after the big guns now, oracle, sql, ibm. Lets see how this thing boils

> over
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "joe" <contact_by_Newsgroup_only.please> wrote in message
> > > news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > I could be wrong but I believe the latest version of MySQL includes
> > > support
> > > > for subqueries. However I note that contrary to what has been said
> > > elsewhere
> > > > it is not free. The licensing for all but a very narrow use is
> > > significant.
> > > >
> > > > It seems to be a product aimed at the market between MS SQL and

MSDE.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > > news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > > I built my application using MSSQL, as it was what I was

accustomed
> to
> > > > > using. However, with the licensing fees being what they are -

when
> my
> > > app
> > > > > outgrew shared hosting and I had to go dedicated, I decided to

> switch
> > to
> > > > > MySQL. I've been really happy with that choice.
> > > > >
> > > > > MySQL definately has some limitations - no stored procs - and

worse,
> > no
> > > > > subqueries. The lack of stored procs isn't that big a loss IMO as

> > MySQL
> > > > has
> > > > > proven to be quicker than SQL Server in my application - and

whilst
> > > speed
> > > > > may not be the only reason to use SPs, it's certainly one of the

> > bigger
> > > > > ones.
> > > > >
> > > > > the loss of subqueries has hurt - not so much in the application
> > > itself -
> > > > > but in maintenance jobs that i need to run. Now I have to run

these
> > > > queries
> > > > > in code so I can use the results of one query in the next. It was

a
> > bit
> > > > of
> > > > > a hassle. Also, MySQL is much much easier on RAM than SQL Server.
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically, if you go for MySQL you're trading off a bit of

> convenience
> > > and
> > > > > ease of development for much lower costs and in my opinion,

slightly
> > > > greater
> > > > > speed.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Vincent V" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > > > > news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > > > > Hey guys im about to start a large project and am wondering what
> > > > > > DB server to use
> > > > > > I have the Choise of MySql(innodb) or if i pay a bit extra i can

> get
> > > MS
> > > > > SQL
> > > > > > 2000
> > > > > > The concerns i have
> > > > > > -What type of limited functionality will i come accros with

MYSQL
> > > > > > ie No stored POCS
> > > > > > -Limitations with the RDBMS system of innodb
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If i go with MySQL + Innodb i think this will be offer the

fastest
> > > > runtime
> > > > > > speed
> > > > > > but how much more code am i going to need using MYSQL rather

than
> MS
> > > > SQL2K
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for your input
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >

> >
> >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John Sparrow
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2003
Didn't SQL Server start life as a product called "DataServer" for Sun
stations, written by Sybase and released in May 1987? Then Microsoft
got in on the act, and for a couple of years it got branded with the
"dBase" label (strange but apparently true!) and sold with
Ashton-Tate.

A while later it had a "radical engine re-design" for version 6.0,
released in 1995.

So, at the oldest it's 16 years old. If the re-design really was
"radical" then it's only 8 years old...

Interbase/Firebird was commercially released in 1985. And hadn't had
any "radical" modifications. So it's 18 years old.

Not that I'm criticising MS SQL Server, use it every day, it's great.
Microsoft are very good at 'broad' products - and things like
Enterprise Manager are excellent.

But if anyone is looking for open source, and needs something less
lightweight than MySQL, I recommend Firebird.

John

"Aemca" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > The code base is mature (it's an off-shoot of Interbase 6, which was
> > started 20 years ago, so it's more mature than SQL Server!)

>
> where do you think MSSQL has its roots then

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Aemca
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2003
ok first remind me to not open my mouth again over things I read on the web
somewhere and don't quite remember where...

Anyway the history of the MSSQL database


relational database beginnings:
http://www.mcjones.org/System_R/SQL_...-Teradata.html

sybase ---> MS SQL

from:
http://www.tietovayla.fi/borland/INT...ybasewp/#notes

Before the release of Microsoft SQL Server 6.0, Sybase SQL Server and
Microsoft SQL Server were the same products. Microsoft SQL Server 4 was
licensed from Sybase and resold under the Microsoft label. In 1995,
Microsoft purchased the code base from Sybase and modified it to produce
Microsoft SQL Server 6.0. Sybase continued development of its SQL Server
product and now markets them under the name Sybase SQL Server System 10 and
System 11. At the heart of both Microsoft SQL Server and the Sybase SQL
Server products lies the same code base. In most cases, the products behave
in the same fashion. For that reason, the term "SQL Server" shall, for the
purpose of this paper, refer to both Microsoft SQL Server and Sybase SQL
Server. Where these two products differ, their respective product names are
used.

-----------------
from 1992 and up:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluat...y/timeline.asp


"John Sparrow" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Didn't SQL Server start life as a product called "DataServer" for Sun
> stations, written by Sybase and released in May 1987? Then Microsoft
> got in on the act, and for a couple of years it got branded with the
> "dBase" label (strange but apparently true!) and sold with
> Ashton-Tate.
>
> A while later it had a "radical engine re-design" for version 6.0,
> released in 1995.
>
> So, at the oldest it's 16 years old. If the re-design really was
> "radical" then it's only 8 years old...
>
> Interbase/Firebird was commercially released in 1985. And hadn't had
> any "radical" modifications. So it's 18 years old.
>
> Not that I'm criticising MS SQL Server, use it every day, it's great.
> Microsoft are very good at 'broad' products - and things like
> Enterprise Manager are excellent.
>
> But if anyone is looking for open source, and needs something less
> lightweight than MySQL, I recommend Firebird.
>
> John
>
> "Aemca" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > > The code base is mature (it's an off-shoot of Interbase 6, which was
> > > started 20 years ago, so it's more mature than SQL Server!)

> >
> > where do you think MSSQL has its roots then



 
Reply With Quote
 
John Sparrow
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-16-2003
LOL, that artical is a good deal more cynical about SQL Server that
the one I read!!

Anyway, point made. SQL Server isn't especially aged, and has
undergone at least one major rewrite.

John

"Aemca" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<ZqaRa.16807$KF1.303485@amstwist00>...
> ok first remind me to not open my mouth again over things I read on the web
> somewhere and don't quite remember where...
>
> Anyway the history of the MSSQL database
>
>
> relational database beginnings:
> http://www.mcjones.org/System_R/SQL_...-Teradata.html

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MySQL-python-1.2.2 install with no mysql washakie Python 4 01-15-2008 08:15 PM
SQL Reference, SQL Queries, SQL help ecoolone ASP .Net 0 01-03-2008 10:58 AM
"mysql.h: No such file or directory" when building MySQL-python francescomoi@europe.com Python 2 05-11-2005 03:12 PM
DBD:mysql doesn't read mysql option file /etc/my.cnf file JL Perl 0 01-28-2005 03:19 AM
"Pure Python" MySQL module like Net::MySQL Ravi Python 6 07-21-2003 06:53 PM



Advertisments