Horton

Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chris.kings-lynne@calorieking.com>

View thread
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chris.kings-lynne@calorieking.com>
To: "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>
Cc: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, John DeSoi <desoi@pgedit.com>, Mark Woodward <pgsql@mohawksoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2006-05-19T01:33:16Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
> And MySQL is much closer to being a competitor now than they were in
> 4.1. And feature-wise they'll probably equal PostgreSQL in the next
> release. Will the features be anywhere near as robust or well thought
> out? No. But in a heck of a lot of companies that doesn't matter.

Don't forget that they got nested transactions and PITR both before us. 
  They will also shortly have really nice partitioning before us...

...don't underestimate their development speed.