What version MySQL are you running, by the way? And do you have the ansi compliance mode turned on? If so, then it will fail on insert like you said it did.

I have 3.23.55-14 i586 as mysql version distribution SuSE 8.2

What is the best way to find out if I am running ANSI compliant switch?

ps awwx|grep mysql

and look for the mysqld started by /bin/sh or something like it with the startup switches. It would be nice to know that Suse installs MySQL with the ansi switch turned on, although MANY applications break when you do so.

Can you quote identifiers with " instead of ` ?

I.e.:

create table "Bubba" (info int);

as opposed to

create table `Bubba` (info int);

The first is ANSI SQL standard, the second is native MySQL operation without the ansi switch turned on.

create database testing;
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.47 sec)

create table "spb2" (info int);
ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near '"spb2" (info int)' at line 1

create table spb2 (info int);
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec)

ps awwx|grep mysql
1330 ? S 0:00 /bin/sh /usr/bin/safe_mysqld --user=mysql --pid-file= /var/lib/mysql/mysqld.pid --socket=/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock --datadir=/var/lib/ mysql
1376 ? S 0:00 [mysqld]
1382 ? S 0:00 [mysqld]
1383 ? S 0:00 [mysqld]

I see no reference to ANSI at all...........

Well, you are running a later version in the 3.xx.yy series than me, I'm on a two year old version. I hadn't figured the behaviour had changed regarding large numbers being inserted and getting converted to max/min(int).

I'll have to download the latest 3.xx.yy rpms and see how it works.

Still, there are other bothersome things I'm not sure will be fixed.

The alter table change column type thing is (was??? don't know yet ) very disconcerting. When you did something like:

create table test (dt text);
(insert a few thousand dates)
alter table change (forget the syntax, change the type of dt to date)

if you had dates it couldn't convert, it would make them 0000-00-00 and your old dates were just gone, no errors, nothing. In my opinion, I'd rather the database scream at me that there are invalid dates and error out, at least needing some kind of "oh go ahead and mung it" switch to be flipped in the SQL to allow the coercion.

Now, with ansi turned on, that problem would go away, since ansi mode doesn't allow 0000-00-00 as a date. But there are others I wanna see if they've fixed in later 3.xx.yy releases. I doubt I'll upgrade to 4.x any time soon, I'm not sure it's as stable as 3.xx.yy seems to be.

Interesting what you say about dates. I am a newbie to MySQL having used Paradox (personally) and Oracle (at work).

So I am sort of learning the whole time with Linux also, it is all new to me after years of Dos, DR-Dos then windows.

Firebird. it works, you not!

Hmmm... I see MySQL is finally catchingup with Firebird.

Thouhg I voted for Firebird, it was still hard to believe that MYSQL was so far behind it

I think the debate that "MY Database is better than yours" is a never ending story. And it was not the right place to start it anyway.

This is a poll-for-popularity. and we should have had left it that way....

While Firebird has covered a million-download mark which is quite remarkable for this comparitively new database, MySQL is far ahead of it in this regard for many years.

I think both have advantages and disadvantages.

MYSQL is an excellent choice for Web-Based applications and Dynamic-data driven websites. As it performs very nice in that case. And for simple queries it is faster than almost any database for sure.

Firebird is more suitable for Client-Server applications as it is simply designed in that fasion. With strong and robust procedural language, refrential integrity, triggers it can out-perform MySQL in a 2-tier and 3-tier client server application.

I think it is not appropriate to compare MySQL with likes of Firebird and DB/2, etc.

The poll should be devided into two separate polls actually.

i.e
a) Database for Web
b) Database for Client-Server applications.

And the results might surprise you !!!


You will see that for Web, MySQL is lot more popular.
Postgress and Firebird will have better scores for Client-Server applications.

MySQL all the way

... only because that's all I know

>> Please consider adding sqlite

Please ...

Looks like it's going to be an extremely close award this year too!!!

Looking forward to the results of all the Chioce awards.

Mysql rulez

We are in the process of picking an open source database to replace MS SQL Server. I spent at least a week comparing the following:

MS SQL Server (that's where we were coming from)
PostgreSQL
Firebird
SAP DB
MySQL

I set up a spreadsheet of 39 criteria, based on my experience with five other RDBMSs. I gave each RDBMS a rating of 1-5 on each item, which gave a total score. Some of the criteria were non-negotiable for us. For instance, we absolutely must have Unicode support. That disqualified MySQL. We also wanted something that would run on Windows, Linux, and Mac.

Scores:
------------------------------
PostgreSQL: 168
Firebird: 141
MS SQL Server: 133
SAP DB: 116
MySQL: 44

(Note to tauseef: You are right. We are using the database for client-server. MySQL came in low because it simply does not have the abilities we need. For instance, it has table locks only. I gave up researching it after I found out it lacked Unicode support.)

We started out using PostgreSQL. However, we changed a couple months later, and we are now pursuing using Firebird. One reason is because Firebird has been working on Windows for many years. PostgreSQL just started. Another is that Firebird's popularity has been growing in the past year, which means it won't die a slow death. Also, the dialect is also closer to SQL Server than PostgreSQL.

My vote went with Firebird, coincidentally putting it at the 400 mark.

As to signing up to vote, I plead guilty. But in my defense, I didn't know this site was here until yesterday. As a Linux newbie, I'm sure I'll be back.

Hi
How can I see final results?

The results will be posted after the polls are closed.

--jeremy