Database holy war

[Kevin Brown]

Is there any site like http://www.netcraft.com/survey/ that shows the usage of
various dbs and platforms?  I'm starting to do some php work with both MySQL and
PostgreSQL.  I've heard that yahoo uses a fairly large cluster of BSD and
Postgres boxen to handle the server load.  From the pointers from my previous
post on SQL (some months back), I was pointed to this page
http://postgresql.readysetnet.com/users-lounge/limitations.html and the claim is
a limit of 64 TB maximum size for a table.  They point out that databases as
large as 60GB are known to exist.  That doesn't mean bigger ones aren't out
there using Postgres, just that is the largest they are aware of.  I would think
that most places use Replication and Mirroring as well as clustering to handle
queries of large databases, e.g. they throw horsepower at the problem of a large
db.

MySQL is definitely the way to go for small personal use databases, but since it
does have a 2GB limit per table can make larger databases impossible, but using
it can give you a basis on standard SQL syntax for moving on to the bigger guys
that you probably couldn't afford as a personal/small business user.

Example:

Pricing from valinux.com

2U Rack system:
Dual 866MHz
256MB RAM
1 9GB 10,000 SCSI Drive
40x CDrom

$2743 

OS:	Linux - $80 (Deluxe with Tech Support from RH)
	W2K Advanced Server (25 Client) - $4000
	
http://shop.microsoft.com/Products/Products_Feed/Online/Windows2000AdvancedServer[10188]/ProductOverview.asp

SQL:	MySQL - Free (Optional Tech Support)
	PostgreSQL - Free
	MSSQL (5 Client) - $1500
	MSSQL Enterprise (25 Client) - $11099

http://shop.microsoft.com/Products/Products_Feed/Online/Windows2000AdvancedServer[10188]/ProductOverview.asp

The computer could easily cost less if you used desktop parts.  The price of
MS's OS is more than the cost of the hardware and the cost of SQL from MS is
definitely prohibitive for a person to use to try out and learn standard SQL on.

> The comment and I quote "that platform is the most popular in the world" is
> incorrect at best and misleading at worst. Yes Microsoft is the most popular
> desktop platform but if one looks at the most popular serious database
> server platform is barely on the charts.
> 
> The labor costs to run a database on a *NIX are no more expensive then
> tiring to run an enterprise Microsoft server. If fact it is usually much
> cheaper since the *NIX's tend to be much stabler and more robust then the
> Microsoft products.
> 
> The question really should be stated, who can afford the cost of the desktop
> OS running as a server? It is possible to save hundreds of thousands of
> dollars by using the correct OS for the correct job. MS on the desktop is ok
> if you like it, MS on the server is pretty funny.
> 
> Given the per seat cost of MS SQL and the cost of the license to run it on,
> and the cost of maintaining the OS on top of that...... The question "Who
> can afford to run freeware" should really be stated Who cannot afford to run
> freeware. No several hundred per seat cost, no OS per seat cost and the same
> OS configuration cost, vs. hundreds of dollars per seat cost and thousands
> of dollars for the OS and the same cost of the OS configuration and the
> higher cost of downtime associated with the OS in question, hmmmmm.
> 
> > 3) If SQL Server may run on only one platform, but on that
> > platform it runs
> > very well.  Second, that platform is the most popular in the
> > world, and
> > Postgres b-a-r-e-l-y runs on it.  Also, the labor costs to
> > run the *nixes
> > that can host Postgres are MUCH higher than for that other OS.
> >       More important, when NT4 was Microsoft's premier OS it
> > was very easy to
> > argue that *nix, and the Free *nix OSes in particular, were viable
> > alternatives.  When I advocate using *nix instead of NT-5
> > people just laugh
> > at me.  NT-5 and SQL Server 7/8 are HUGE improvements over their
> > predecessors.  They are probably SO much easier to use, that
> > they make it
> > CHEAPER to use Microsoft products than to run freeware.
> >
> > I mean, besides academia, academics, and NPOs who A) have
> > obscenely cheap
> > labor costs and B) may actually want to hack the base code,
> > who can afford
> > freeware.
> >
> > That bears repeating:
> >
> > Who can afford freeware??!!
> >
> 
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
> 
> PLUG-discuss mailing list  -  PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss