Re: Why SQL Server over MySQL

From: Kevin Kline (kevin.kline_at_quest.com)
Date: 09/27/04 

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 21:30:19 -0500

Hi Mike,

The most important difference is a lack of truly important features in
MySQL. For example, MySQL did not support any kind of atomic transactions
(i.e. the ability to explicitly rollback or commit a transaction) until
after version 4.0. Even then it's not a robust transaction processing
engine like SQL Server's. (MySQL's claims for high performance do not hold
true or are at least less true when many of their newest feautures are
enabled.) Another feature that wasn't supported until recently are
subqueries. Again, the support that is now present is much less than what
you'd get in a mature product like SQL Server. I believe that views are
also either not supported or only newly supported.

MySQL still does not support stored procedures. It is probably a biggy for
a lot of shops. Also, MySQL tools still leave a lot to desire. Expect to
spend a while getting up to speed on the tools, plus all the time needed to
figure out all of the stuff not supported by any sort of tool such as
editing the .INI files.

Finally, I have seen shops that have made good use of MySQL as part of their
corporate DB. In general, I've seen MySQL succeed in shops where the
database is essentially disposable, say where all the data is duplicated on
a couple servers. But they spent a lot of time getting a good understanding
of the features and capabilities of the product. Don't just jump into it
based on a few water-cooler discussions. It'll take real planning to make
your deployment work, should you decide to go on MySQL.

Best regards,

-Kevin Kline
 SQL Server MVP
 Quest Software (www.quest.com/quest_central/sql_server/freeware/)
 The Professional Association for SQL Server (www.sqlpass.org)

"Mike London" <mikey@email.unc.edu> wrote in message
news:uxTC38XoEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> We have several developers in our organization pushing to use MySQL but
> I have not heard any good arguments as of yet. I was wondering if any
> of you have any points that can be made for SQL Server versus MySQL.
>
> Personally I prefer SQL Server but I would be very interested in hearing
> your feedback on the matter.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Mike

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SQL server vs mySQL ???
    ... SQL Server has the broadest range of tools and support utilities of any database system on the planet--by far. ... MS SQL versus MySQL? ... 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). ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)
  • 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)
  • Re: Some free utilities for Java, with Hebrew support.
    ... protocol and server and add "extensions" to make their product more ... Provided you want to remain compatible with the "stock" MySQL ... the server you were using to support something ... client libraries don't support or in changing the protocol to break ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: SQL difference - mySQL and MS SQL
    ... MySQL is pretty far behind most of the other database ... They just added support for things such as stored ... I have never seen such a reference, and it highly depends on the version ... version 4 is nowhere near Microsoft SQL Server (in any version I've ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.connect)
  • Re: SQL Servers Vs mySQL
    ... It is my understanding that if you use the MyISAM table type with MySQL ... that it performs faster than SQL Server and is pretty much the fastest ... the MyISAM table type does not offer transactional support. ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.odbc)
Loading