Re: SQL server vs mySQL ???

Greg makes a number of great points but I would add another thought. How expensive is it to develop, support, administer, manage, protect, monitor, debug and train developers to use MySQL? SQL Server has the broadest range of tools and support utilities of any database system on the planet--by far. Virtually all of these same tools and languages work for the free versions as well as the expensive ones. If replication is required, consider that ADO.NET Synchronization Services is in the wings and promises to provide a solid replication architecture later this year.

--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant, Dad, Grandpa
Microsoft MVP
INETA Speaker
www.betav.com
www.betav.com/blog/billva
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
Visit www.hitchhikerguides.net to get more information on my latest book:
Hitchhiker's Guide to Visual Studio and SQL Server (7th Edition)
and Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2005 Compact Edition (EBook)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:ucm42%23QAIHA.748@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The easiest way to support multiple databases is to work with a data access layer that incorporates a factory method, driven by configuration. This means you have a common interface to retrieve data.

MS SQL versus MySQL?
This question changes depending on which version of MySQL one has. As of 5.0, MySQL finally supports stored procedures, so they are very similar there (you can genericize your data access a bit due to sprocs in both). If you use sprocs for your data access, you will find the main change, other than provider used to access data, is the sproc definition.

Differences?
* MySQL has a variety of APIs for data access, but is not extensible on the engine itself (ala, CLR assembllies in SQL Server 2005)
* SQL Server has richer trigger support (as does oracle)
* MySQL has a richer datetime model, including both date, time and year data types. It also has an enum type, although enumeration tables with foreign key relations fulfill this requirement in SQL Server.

The majority of other changes are in the engine and dependent on storage type. For example, to enable the use of foreign key relations, you have to use the InnoDB format, which removes some types of indexing options. To cluster, you have to use the NDB format. The list goes on:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/storage-engine-choosing.html

Overall, MySQL has gone a long way, but it is still not at the level of either SQL Server or Oracle. But, it is good choice for many organizations.

As for pricing, MySQL is definitely cheaper in raw costs. And, if your clients have expertise in MySQL, they may find that it is as inexpensive to manage as SQL Server. If the expertise is thin in their area, they will pay a premium for MySQL geeks, which may offset the difference in pricing.

The question, for you, is whether or not support for MySQL is a good business decision. This is really a question of how many clients you gain if you support MySQL.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP, MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

*************************************************
| Think outside the box! |
*************************************************
"calderara" <calderara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:02D109E8-3CC4-4B34-9F68-CFA297D5197F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear all,

I am buidling application where most of my back end database is SQL server.
Now I have a set of customer requesting for instance to use mySQL instead of
SQL server.
They are many programming language as many database product, so knowing them
all is quite impossible. Its better to deliver goood service on one
particular.

So what I am trying to do is explaining to my customer the clear defference
between SQL server and mySQL except trhe price of course.

What is the limits of mySQL compare to SQL server ?
What customer would never do with mySQL as they could with SQl server ?

I need in a way to warn my custoemr about that choice cmpare to another

Thnaks for your help
serge



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why SQL Server over MySQL
    ... MySQL did not support any kind of atomic transactions ... Even then it's not a robust transaction processing ... you'd get in a mature product like SQL Server. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.server)
  • RE: Transfer LARGE DB from MySQL to SQL Server 2K5 problems
    ... newsgroups are managed (and making that a selling point for MSDN ... forums, which, needless to say, drives me away from the MS web sites, and is ... I am going through the MySQL ODBC v3.51 driver, ... streaming across the wire to my SQL Server box. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.dts)
  • Re: Newbie, True and False
    ... All commands, Insert, Update etc work fine with MySql, but not with MsSql. ... First time working on an SQL database. ... will need to relearn when using sql server. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients)
  • Re: Access 2007 and MySQL
    ... Anyone tried MySQL as backend for recent Acc2k7 FE developments? ... You can however if you want choose SQL server for your back end and then you ... For the most part most your recordset code and most queries should work as ... Set rstRecords = CurrentDb.OpenRecordset ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: SQL server vs mySQL ???
    ... The easiest way to support multiple databases is to work with a data access ... This question changes depending on which version of MySQL one has. ... * SQL Server has richer trigger support ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)