MySQL v. PostgreSQL, continued, was: Microsoft Access - two questions

[Ted Roche]

>Paul Lussier wrote:

> It is lacking features[1][2], and I've certainly seen plenty (if not most)
> uses of MySQL completely abuse it to the point where the "developer"
> completely missed the "R" point RDB[3].

Most programmers are amateurs. Even the really, really good ones.
Business application programmers follow the same normal curve as most
everything else: few really, really good ones, few really, really bad
ones, but the bad ones leave such memorable disasters behind them!

More fuel for the fire... Josh Berkus blogs,

"What is does show is that PostgreSQL and MySQL are very, very close in
performance today and the outdated belief that MySQL is somehow multiple
times faster than PostgreSQL is dramatically misplaced. Users should be
picking a database based on which specific performance features, and
other features, they need in their database and not out of some ignorant
assessment that "Database X is way faster." That's pretty much been true
for years, but the very close benchmark results shows that pretty clearly."

Source:
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/benchmark-brouhaha-17939

Competition is Good.

-- 
Ted "Amateur == From the Heart" Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com