Re: SQLBoss Developer - Makes database development & content management much easier.
I'll bet it's not the last either ... :(
As an aside, much database related fun can be had at www.dbdebunk.com (http://www.dbdebunk.com). SQL fans in general (and MySQL fans in particular) should wear a hard hat ... !
Re: The right tool for the job...
Apologies to those offended by Postgress vs PostGreSQL.
None taken, and none intended I'm sure. I'm way more touchy about the "Ingress" vs. "Ingres" one, esp. when it's techies in our own company (or reporters in computing mags) !
IMHO .db,.dbm,and db3 were not as easy to deal with as MySQL was, particularly with PHP and web applications.
They can be a pain, but they've got their place.
When tying to tie a couple of ISPs who's ideas about admining systems are vastly different at the time of acquisition, an application was needed in a hurry, and using 'MySQL-Apache-PHP' a solution was there and available in a week.
Then it's the right choice by a mile. If you can move that quickly, and there's enough of the right expertise about, why look any place else indeed ?
LDAP would have taken longer,
LDAP is one of those "good things" I've always meant to spend a little time with, but never quite got around to until recently, and I must admit to being quite impressed with it for a few things. The O'Reilly "Network Printing" book was a surprising place to get a shove into looking at LDAP, but there you go.
and I was a contractor, I did was they asked me to do.
Being a contractor can put things into a whole new ball park; sometimes you can be pretty restricted in terms of what you can and can't do or install or use or whatever.
... snip (which I pretty much agree with, by the way) ...
Circa 1994 I remember a FAQ on 'free' databases available for UNIX. It contained a list of features and limits of many different databases for UNIX. A updated version of that document may have been a better place to spend energy rather than complaining as to which databse is more widely accepted, bemoaning the fact, and pondering the reasons it is the way it is.
I think that FAQ is still out there somewhere, but it still mentions some DBMSs that I don't hear anything about any more, and didn't list the interesting Java DBMSs (PointBase, Cloudscape etc) for obvious reasons. It might be quite interesting to see this brought up to date, but it would be quite an undertaking nowadays.
Complaining and pontificating are less effective at educating than comprehensive information is.
MySQL has a niche it has etched out for it's self.
I agree with that wholeheartedly. But we're about to disagree now...
Is it the best tool? No. Is PostGreSQL? No (that may be difficult to accept for some).
Before saying "best", define "best". Best for what ? For high volume read-intense/low-write serving ? For reasonably concurrent write situations ? For high volume read where SQL isn't required ?
Let's take an analogous situation; what's the best programming language ? If you've already got an answer, then you're wrong, because I haven't told you what I want you to do yet ! (OCAML fans are about to start hitting send as I speak...!) If I want you to write metal-bashing code, then the answer should be different to if I was asking you to write an expert system with full backtracking capabilities.
The same thing holds true for databases. What is just the ticket for one application could be horribly horribly wrong (for any number of reasons) for the next one.
Reading several of your replys to others you seem to have a strong aversion to anything MySQL.
No, I don't; honestly, and if I've given that impression then it's because I haven't been sufficiently clear in my writing. It simply didn't do the job I needed an open source RDBMS to do a few years back. This may be because I followed the opposite route to the one you outlined earlier; I moved from a commercial database (Ingres) to a free database (PostgreSQL), so my expectations & demands may have been quite different to someone in a different situation. As I said elsewhere, the situation with MySQL may well be different now. When I was looking back then ('96 - '97) I started with mSQL, then tried MySQL then wound up with PostgreSQL, so MySQL had a shot (I had actually heard of MySQL before PostgreSQL). If I was doing the same eval now, I might wind up with a different result. I'm open to that possibility, but I'm quite happy with PostgreSQL (within reasonable bounds), so haven't felt the need to dig about too much in the time since.
What ever MySQL has done to step on your tail, there is not much I can do about it, nor any of the other users of MySQL.
And I wouldn't ask you (or anyone else, for that matter) to do anything about it; it's up to me to go and find out about these things if I discover my current toolbox is deficient somewhere.
Sorry you don't like MySQL, but MySQL serves a need otherwise it would be so much discarded code littering the information super highway.
Absolutely it does.
As to why can't open source deliver a 'Enterprise' level data base server? Probably because it's not high on the importance factor of most developers. It requires more complicated engineering from the start. It has always been the realm of the 'heavy hitters' (ie Oracle, Sybase, IBM et all).
I agree with some of this, but age & maturity of the code has a lot to do with it too. DB2's roots are way back at the beginning of implemented RDBMSs in the early '70s; Ingres dates from about '77, and Oracle about the same (ISTR copyrights for about 1979 in Oracle installations). They've had a long time to look at how to keep these beasties up and running, backed up and safe as houses. The open source databases can do the querying, but they don't have the management facilities that have been built up into these products over time.
It's a long way to go from PostGreSQL to DB2.
A very long way. To get an idea, remembering that PostgreSQL's roots are very close to those of Ingres, compare PostgreSQL to a current commercial implementation of Ingres. Hell, have a look at the source code of University Ingres (still available, but likely not buildable on anything modern) and compare that. Open source databases could be extended to match the "heavy hitters"; but it'll take a long time, and requires a type of testing effort that might not be available in an open source environment.
Even running PostGreSQL as native code on OS/390 it would be a long journey filled with DB2 bigots slandering PostGreSQL at every line of code.
Well, they slag Ingres at every opportunity ... :)))))