Article reviews and compares: MySQL, Oracle 10g, Microsoft SQL Server, and IBM DB2
Quote:For many businesses, a database is the vital organ that lives, breathes, and protects precious data -- the treasured jewel of their enterprise. Everything they know, and every way to know it, is dictated by these all-powerful tools...
The database must look after their stock, customer lists, and seamlessly integrate with their accounting system for billing and purchasing...
Release 5.0 of MySQL is really taking it to the Oracle and DB2 with advanced features such as cluster support and fault tolerance...MySQL V5.0 is a compelling product and it is hard to argue against its nomination for the Editor's Choice award
full article:
http://www.builderau.com.au/architect/da...962,00.htm
Article questions the basis of the builder.au database comparison test:
Quote:Not to pick on MySQLI'm glad to see they were picked to be editor's choice in Builder AU's recent road test of databases, which compared MySQL, SQL Server Express, DB2 Express and Oracle 10g Standard Edition...
But is the premise of the review actually sound? For the purpose of comparing MySQL to the "lite" versions of the proprietary databases, Builder AU created a hypothetical online business, relatively small, that sells books and DVDs...
full article:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1906786,00.asp
Conveniently left out of both articles is (the corporate owned) MySQL's real competitor: (the only non-corporate owned database): PostGreSQL...which I think would have beaten MySQL (by a small margin) if it was included in the comparison test.
On the matter of testing mySQL against Oracle Lite instead of the full product: granted Oracle would win in the features and scalability departments, but MySQL wins hands down for reliability and uptime over Oracle.
Here we go again. The never ending debate MySQL vs. Postgres
