RE: [SQL-Ledger-users] evaluation of sql-ledger

[Ing. A. A. G. <ag...@ma...>]

MySQL revisited again.

Pleased check what happens when you put more than 2 Millions of rows on =
a
MySQL DB and then try the same on PostgreSQL, then we can talk about =
truly
DB performance.

FYI one of the largest DB in the world is a 60 GB DB on Japan and this =
DB
dont choice MySQL because his lack performance on a very large DB. This =
DB
run on PostgreSQL.

Antonio Gallardo.



-----Mensaje original-----
De: sql...@li...
[mailto:sql...@li...]En nombre de Kim =
C.
Callis
Enviado el: S=E1bado, 27 de Enero de 2001 04:25 a.m.
Para: sql...@li...
Asunto: Re: [SQL-Ledger-users] evaluation of sql-ledger


"Ing. Antonio A. Gallardo" wrote:

>
>
> Hi Craig!
>
> Please explain why you are creating a terminal frontend to =
SQL-Ledger.
> I think that Web based Aplications is the new wave of office =
products.
> Let see at MS .net project for example.
>
> If you want, you can do anything with SQL-Ledger source. But the goal
> to archive is to create a account application Web-based.
>
> PHP is great, and maybe he will save us many problems about UI. =
Please
> Dieter explain us why you dont choose PHP in the develop of
> SQL-Ledger.
>
> I think that MySQL is a low-end DBMS. PostgreSQL is more powerfull =
and
> we will approach the powerful features of PostgreSQL. Dieter again,
> please answer us what you think about that.
>
> I will be glad to open a discussion about the Roadmap of SQL-Ledger =
to
> all the users.
>

I am curious about two of your above statements... First off, I think
that it is applaudable that Craig is attempting to create a curses
interface to SQL-Ledger. An application should be designed in such a =
way
that allows it to be modified to meet the needs of any end user. Take =
an
application like Quickbooks (since we are on an accounting path here!).
This is a nice application for some, but by no means does it really =
meet
the needs of all. Unfortunately, there is no real quick and easy way to
modify it to be useful. I think Craig gave a very valid explaination of
why he is doing such a modification.

Secondly, I was curious to hear about how you qualify your view of =
MySQL
being a "low -end" DBMS. The lacking feature of MySQL at one time was
handling transactions. Of course that was prior to 3.23, because that
requirement has been put in to production. From a benchmark =
perspective,
MySQL is in fact faster than PostgreSQL, by a significant margin. Of
course this was due to a transaction mechanism which easily made MySQL
faster. Nevertheless, although I am by no leaps and bounds a MySQL
evangelist, I will say that MySQL does a nice job of holding it's own.