2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice AwardsThis forum is for the 2003 LinuxQuestions.org Members Choice Awards.
You can now vote for your favorite products of 2003. This is your chance to be heard!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Originally posted by buttersoft 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 ` ?
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.
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]
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
MS SQL Server: 133
SAP DB: 116
(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.