|
|
![]() |
|
|
Top | #1 |
|
OSNN Veteran Addict
Joined: April 2003
Location: In The Void
Posts: 6,373
Blog Entries: 9
Reputation: 1877
Power: 193 |
I'm just wondering if you can convert between the 2 and how hard would it be? |
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #2 |
|
Godlike!
Joined: February 2004
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 7,031
Blog Entries: 5
Reputation: 4137
Power: 213 |
as long as you don't use features native to either database engine you can port data across easily.
It's not hard for webhosts to provide pgsql if asked either ![]() Most don't install it because most don't know about it being run by 13 year olds and all
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #3 |
|
OSNN Veteran Addict
Joined: April 2003
Location: In The Void
Posts: 6,373
Blog Entries: 9
Reputation: 1877
Power: 193 |
eh ? - 13 year olds wot ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #4 |
|
Dominus
Joined: March 2002
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,570
Reputation: 660
Power: 146 |
... meaning using pg is the l33t database to use because it's less known and only real men use it. Nevermind that MySQL is now owned by Sun. ZOMG SQL Wars! SQLite 4evaaaaa!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #5 |
|
Godlike!
Joined: February 2004
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 7,031
Blog Entries: 5
Reputation: 4137
Power: 213 |
no, meaning that kiddie hosts don't usually have a clue as to the options that they can provide to users
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #6 |
|
OSNN Veteran Addict
Joined: April 2003
Location: In The Void
Posts: 6,373
Blog Entries: 9
Reputation: 1877
Power: 193 |
straight answer would have been nice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #7 |
|
Godlike!
Joined: February 2004
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 7,031
Blog Entries: 5
Reputation: 4137
Power: 213 |
you had one...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #8 |
|
Dominus
Joined: March 2002
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 1,570
Reputation: 660
Power: 146 |
Yes, you were given a straight answer. Databases can be easily converted to one or another. Even if you use native database functions, it would be trivial to write a script to convert your data if you were familiar with both to convert. Unless you need specific database functions not available in one, there really is no reason to prefer one over the other. Both have been used under a lot of performance pressure by many people. Your only real decision is which you prefer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #9 |
|
Godlike!
Joined: February 2004
Location: Salisbury, Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 7,031
Blog Entries: 5
Reputation: 4137
Power: 213 |
I'm not certain of this regards mysql 5 as I've not looked at any benchmarks for it, however PostgreSQL was able to sustain many more queries with much more data at lower system resource usage than mysql 3 and 4 when Yahoo and some other big DB user were researching. I believe Yahoo chose mysql in the end though as it better fit their needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top | #10 |
|
OSNN Veteran Addict
Joined: April 2003
Location: In The Void
Posts: 6,373
Blog Entries: 9
Reputation: 1877
Power: 193 |
i may have to side with mysql as a few things i am looking at using are really only supported on mysql even though the sites the scripts are on say otherwise - even talking with some devs who say they will most likely be going full mysql only - so i may as well switch to mysql myself now
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| MYSQL Replication? | Eagle710 | Linux & BSD | 2 | December 3rd, 2007 6:56pm |
| sorting mySQL | jimi_81 | Web Design & Coding | 5 | May 6th, 2005 12:36am |
| VB 6 and mySQL | disavowed00 | Web Design & Coding | 5 | January 15th, 2005 8:29pm |
| PHP and Mysql | luish | Web Design & Coding | 7 | August 24th, 2003 6:27pm |
| PHP MySQL | 5meg | Web Design & Coding | 3 | February 2nd, 2002 1:34pm |