Vick Khera <vivek@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Scott Ribe <scott_ribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Also, my understanding is that if you go way back on the PostgreSQL timeline to versions 6 and earliest 7.x, it was a little shaky. (I started with 7.3 or 7.4, and it has been rock solid.) > In those same times, mysql was also, um, other than rock solid. I don't have enough operational experience with mysql to speak to how reliable it was back in the day. What it *did* have over postgres back then was speed. It was a whole lot faster, particularly on the sort of single-stream-of-simple-queries cases that people who don't know databases are likely to set up as benchmarks. (mysql still beats us on cases like that, though not by as much.) I think that drove quite a few early adoption decisions, and now folks are locked in; the cost of conversion outweighs the (perceived) benefits. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
