PostgreSQL vs. MySQL, was: MySQL premium services?

[Mike Garfias]

mysqldump isn't a hot backup, it causes locks table and/or row (i cant
remember off hand which).  There is a myisamhotbackup or something like that
for MyISAM tables (why the hell would you use MyISAM?), but for a real table
you need the innodb hot backup thing that is commercial, and not cheap.
Also, MySQL replication isn't as trivial as you've made it sound in previous
posts.  A simple master->slave setup is pretty easy, but once you get into
more complex setups its definitely not easy.  Also, even the master->slave
type replication is by no means perfectly reliable, we have to run scripts
to keep slaves sync'd with the master as we've had problems with inserts not
making it into the slave.

Personally, I wish we were using PG at work, but then when it was tried
(years ago, before my time) it was found to be slow.  Of course, in talking
to the principals there, it became clear the box was memory limited, and not
tuned at all.

PG requires far more tuning than MySQL does.  I still like it better though.

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Charles Jones <
charles.jones at ciscolearning.org> wrote:

> kitepilot at kitepilot.com wrote:
> > The final single reason why I went Postgres was backups.
> > Back in the day when I did my research (this may have changed) you could
> not
> > take a hot backup in MySQL without purchasing a commercial product, as
> > opposite as Postgres that you can simply hot-backup a fully consistent
> > database with pgdump.
> >
> man mysqldump  :-)
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20081204/a3ddf9f9/attachment.htm