Re: [cobalt-users] Wish List...

[Kris Dahl <krislists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>> But one key feature that Interbase and PostgreSQL are both
>> missing are very fast performance.  This is, of course, one
>> really nice thing about MySQL.  I am a firm believer that MySQL
>> will catch up with MSSQL, Oracle, PostgreSQL, etc. in features
>> before any of them catch up in speed.
> 
> Umm...Funny, last I checked MySQL chose NOT to implement the vast
> majority of features required by the ACID test where as PostgreSQL
> chose to implement them.  Transactions and rollbacks are obviously
> the most important abstances from MySQL lineup.
> 
> Beyond that, for speed, try PostgreSQL without the fsync() after
> every operation.  Do this and you will get comparable speed to
> MySQL which means MySQL can't be syncing to disk after every write
> or is somehow buffering writes.  PostgreSQL defaults to the fsync()
> behavior to ensure all buffers are properly flushed and data is
> committed to the drive ASAP so it will not be lost in the event
> of a problem.  Although, if they implement a synchronous means
> of access into the linux kernel, as they were discussing to help
> Oracle run better on linux, then PostgreSQL and MySQL would stand
> to benefit as well.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that MySQL, while not ACID
compliant, still meets the needs of the vast majority of people that will be
deploying a RDBMS on a Cobalt server.

Transactions and rollbacks are critical features for an enterprise RDBMS,
but not neccessarily many/most database-backed websites.  Speed is more of
an issue, I guess I am saying.

I had not heard about that fsync issue before, but it is interesting.  I
will do some investigations.

But I still believe that MySQL will become a enterprise class RDBMS fairly
shortly and that it is a good choice for the long haul.

-k