Russian text is here.
Good article about MySQL vs Postgresql. Summary for lazy readers -
"MySQL is designed with the idea that applications provide logic and the database provides dumb storage of the application's state. While this has changed a bit with the addition of user-defined functions and stored procedures, the overall design constrains MySQL primarily to this use case. This is not necessarily a bad thing as, traditionally, software licensing costs and requirements have often required that even advanced database systems like Oracle are used in this way. MySQL targets the "my app, my database" world and is usually sufficient for this, particularly when lowest common denominators are used to ensure portability.
PostgreSQL, on the other hand, is designed with the idea that the database itself is a modelling tool, and that the applications interact with it over an API defined in SQL. Object-relational modelling advocates point out that often getting acceptable performance in complex situations requires an ability to put some forms of logic in the database and even tie this to data structures in the database. In this model, the database itself is a development platform which exposes API's, and multiple applications may read or write data via these API's. It is thus best seen as an advanced data modelling, storage, and centralization solution rather than as a simple application back-end.
These differences show, I think, that when PostgreSQL people complain that MySQL is not a "real database management system" and MySQL people dispute this that in fact the real difference is in definitions, and in this case the definitions are deceptively far apart. Understanding those differences is, I think, the key to making an informed choice."
Good article about MySQL vs Postgresql. Summary for lazy readers -
"MySQL is designed with the idea that applications provide logic and the database provides dumb storage of the application's state. While this has changed a bit with the addition of user-defined functions and stored procedures, the overall design constrains MySQL primarily to this use case. This is not necessarily a bad thing as, traditionally, software licensing costs and requirements have often required that even advanced database systems like Oracle are used in this way. MySQL targets the "my app, my database" world and is usually sufficient for this, particularly when lowest common denominators are used to ensure portability.
PostgreSQL, on the other hand, is designed with the idea that the database itself is a modelling tool, and that the applications interact with it over an API defined in SQL. Object-relational modelling advocates point out that often getting acceptable performance in complex situations requires an ability to put some forms of logic in the database and even tie this to data structures in the database. In this model, the database itself is a development platform which exposes API's, and multiple applications may read or write data via these API's. It is thus best seen as an advanced data modelling, storage, and centralization solution rather than as a simple application back-end.
These differences show, I think, that when PostgreSQL people complain that MySQL is not a "real database management system" and MySQL people dispute this that in fact the real difference is in definitions, and in this case the definitions are deceptively far apart. Understanding those differences is, I think, the key to making an informed choice."
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий