• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Need A More Robust Database

Yahweh

Philosopher
Y
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
9,006
Currently, I am running several database-driven websites programmed in ASP. I've been using MSAccess databases because they are readily available, and they were the databases I learned to program with in the first place.

However, some of my websites with high traffic or complicated database processing are beginning to choke. Now, I've never used anything but MSAccess, but I am ready to give Access the boot and switch to a more capable database.

Specifically, I am considering using MySQL, because it is cheap and inexpensive. Seeing that it 2:40 AM, and I have zero prior experience with MySQL, I am at a loss of where to otain the relevant software to begin working with MySQL databases (I've tried mysql.com, but felt overwhelmed). Assistence in this area would be most helpful :)
 
Since I'm a shill for Microsoft (apparently), it would be remiss of me not to point you towards SQLServer Express. This is a cut-down version of the full bickie SQL Server 2005, and is obviously an attempt by Microsoft to lure customers away from such products as MySQL.

What you get is a full featured database engine using the same core as SQL Server 2005, and since this is a Microsoft product it also comes with excellent documentation.

The beta edition is free, the release version will sell for a nominal cost, around $US49.00 I believe.

http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/
 
PogoPedant said:
If you wanna try a real database, rather than strange little MySQL, why not give PostGreSQL a go?
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about MySQL, but I was certainly under the impression that it has matured into a very nice database. On what are you basing your claim that MySQL is not a "real" database (whatever that means)?
 
I've been working with MySQL databases (and PHP) on quite a number of high-traffic sites, it never failed. Never had to install it myself though, the hosting companies did (or it was already installed).

For high-traffic or complicated queries, make the fields of the tables as slim as possible, and put an index on each field you query. That way you can easily deal with millions of records and thousands of visitors a day.

Check out phpmyAdmin, it's a free webbased tool to admin your MySQL stuff.
 
It partly depends how much you want your database to handle the full suite of requirements of a 'relational' database. MySQL apparently falls short the standards of the commercial products.

One database that you should consider, IMHO, is the MySQL product that is called MaxDB.

This is the result of the long history of development of Adabas, which became SAPDB, then MaxDB. It's long history of development means it is stable, reliable, and capable of handling large data and transaction loads.

SAP is very fussy about the databases it certifies to run it's product, and SAPDB is one of the few.
 
wahrheit said:
I've been working with MySQL databases (and PHP) on quite a number of high-traffic sites, it never failed. Never had to install it myself though, the hosting companies did (or it was already installed).
Click to expand...

I've seen it fail on wikipedia.
 
Iconoclast said:
I don't know anything about MySQL, but I was certainly under the impression that it has matured into a very nice database. On what are you basing your claim that MySQL is not a "real" database (whatever that means)?
Click to expand...

I code high volume high throughput real-time database applications, and I *love* PostgreSQL.

MySQL is still nowhere near ACID compliant. It likes to truncate or insert nulls where you had good data - silently!@! And lots of other bad things. (As if that alone weren't enough!)

That said, MySQL has much fancier graphical administration tools, and is quite attractive to people when full ACID compliance isn't a concern. (PErsonally, I'm always concerned, but then I'm kind of a stickler for my data's integrity... call me crazy.)

Edit: OOPS, this is scribble on the wrong account.
 
Iconoclast said:
I don't know anything about MySQL, but I was certainly under the impression that it has matured into a very nice database. On what are you basing your claim that MySQL is not a "real" database (whatever that means)?
Click to expand...
I base it completely on hearsay...

I've never used the thing myself, but I did read a comparison between mySQL and a couple of other databases where the author mentioned that mySQL does not support foreign keys. To me, that means that mySQL is a table-maintainence system rather than a database. (It could also mean that the author was a hack that didn't examine mySQL properly...) Unfortunately, I don't have the link anymore.

Of course, I work with databases as little as possible, and I tend to use harsher language than strictly necessary. Hope I didn't step on anybody's toes.
 
Chareen said:
MySQL is still nowhere near ACID compliant. It likes to truncate or insert nulls where you had good data - silently!@! And lots of other bad things. (As if that alone weren't enough!)
Click to expand...
Thanks Chareen.
 
PogoPedant said:
I've never used the thing myself, but I did read a comparison between mySQL and a couple of other databases where the author mentioned that mySQL does not support foreign keys.
Click to expand...
I find that exceedingly difficult to believe, since foreign key relations are -- by definition -- a requirement of any relational database.
 
The MaxDB features

Benefits
Reduced cost of your SAP implementation
Easy configuration and low administration
Elaborate backup and restore capabilities
Continuous operation, no scheduled downtimes required
Designed for large number of users and high workloads
Scales to database sizes in the terabytes
High availability through cluster and hot-standby support
Synchronization Manager to control enterprise-wide data replication
Easy-to-use graphical database tools
Available for all enterprise HW/OS platforms
Supports all major SAP solutions
Click to expand...
 
MySQL is decent for medium-sized apps. For something of ultra-high traffic, I wouldn't use it. Especially if you're into stored procedures and triggers (they're just getting around to including those).

For a good, robust, solid DB, I would suggest postgresql.
 
Cleon said:
MySQL is decent for medium-sized apps. For something of ultra-high traffic, I wouldn't use it. Especially if you're into stored procedures and triggers (they're just getting around to including those).
Click to expand...
My post above in which I stated that I was under the impression that MySQL had developed into a nice product was based on the assumption that it now supports stored procs and triggers, and I'm pretty sure such features have been available since a release six months ago or thereabouts.

I consider stored procedures critical for any public facing database, allowing the user to fire an immediate SQL query at a database is a real security issue. If the public user account has stored procedure permissions but not immediate SQL permissions you can much more easily control just what data the user can view and modify, you don't need to reparse the queries coming in to check for possible nefarious intent. Plus you get a nice performance boost.

In any case, I'd still recommend SQL Server Express because it has known performance and stability. This assumes that you can live with the limitations of this cut down version: Max 1 processor, Max 1GB in-memory footprint, Max 4GB database filesize.
 
Well the industry leaders are DB/2 and Oracle. Both allow free downloads for evaluation and have different prices for different editions. The DBAs I work with all reckon SQL Server sucks compared to DB/2, Oracle, Sybase et al.
 
Wudang said:
Well the industry leaders are DB/2 and Oracle. Both allow free downloads for evaluation and have different prices for different editions.
Click to expand...
Well, now you're talking about a different league. I don't think Yahweh would be interested in coughing up the $5000 odd to buy the entry level Oracle product, and I believe the cheapest DB2 offerings are more expensive again. This thread is in relation to free or inexpensive databases, so neither of those products fits the bill.

Wudang said:
The DBAs I work with all reckon SQL Server sucks compared to DB/2, Oracle, Sybase et al.
Click to expand...
I've used SQL Server and Oracle 8i/9i for many years, I think they're both excellent products. Each certainly has its shortcomings -- SQL Server is easier to install and maintain and comes out of the box with easier to use backend tools, Oracle supports stored procedure packages and materialized views, it supposedly scales better though I believe this performance gap has been largely closed -- but any blanket claim that either product "sucks" sounds like simple sniping to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom