Oracle VS MySQL

well some body gave a red ( - credits for ) for this reply
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=6749850#post6749850

well lemme ask that person that how easy is SOCKET programming, well you need to do that then fix it with the front end like Java, c++ if u want to use orcale over a network and then install it in all computers, also the big problem is taht the database is stored locally on all nodes and any change in one node is reflected on all....Some BODY tell me about DATA REDUNDANCY....


with MY sql only a central DATA BASE IS needed and just the Path/ IP address is needed to acess the DB, also the Db needs password anyway so security is not compromised unless ya as said b4 u are working with NASA, DEA, CIA...

thank you...i think some big guy will again give me some bad credits for all the ego hurting information i have given, but whatever i said is true. MY SQL IS BETTER THAN ORACLE FOR NORMAL HUMANS.....BUUT NOT FOR SUPER SENSITIVE DATA.....


peace..

 

Hahaha. Attitudue, I like it.

 

the db business is:

oracle ($$$)
ms sql ($$)
foxpro ($)
mysql (free)

 

Mysql is the best DB for websites. LAMP (Linux, Apache,Mysql and PHP)

 

The answer to this question is in history. All you OpenSource fanboys were going crazy over Linux 10 years ago claiming a takeover of Windows soon. What happened? Ease of use and thus market dominance is still with Windows.

Same for any other OpenSource software. Give me the same level performance, security, features and support as Oracle does, I will switch to mySQL. Until then, Oracle remains as Oracle.

 

in my opinion, for commercial projects, it's better to use oracle than mysql

 

I don't think so, I like more the paid, professional tools, such as ASP with Ms SQL or Oracle, than LAMP. Just because it's free, it doesn't mean that it is the best.

 

i work for a large public company. my division has a very large internet based site that does huge amounts of volume/traffic. we use both oracle and mysql in-house.

oracle is great, dont get me wrong. i actually really like it. it's very feature-rich.

that said, the big difference is performance. oracle does not compare to mysql when youre talking about thousands of concurrent threads accessing the database. a mysql server running on old dual intel cpu servers (commodity hardware) outperforms our $200,000 oracle servers exponentially.

i agree with one of the posts on the first page where someone posted "it depends what youre using it for"

i agree wholeheartedly with that assessment.

oracle has its place and i've written quite a bit of code that uses lots of great oracle features. things that would not be possible in mysql for a long time. i would highly recommend oracle to places that can afford the hardware, the licensing, and a few high priced dbas.

for people who want to get the job done just as well for 1/16 the cost and have exponentially better performance, use mysql.

to be fair, however, if mysql had the featureset oracle had, it'd probably be as slow too.

 

i agree. we've tried making oracle work with hi-volume sites with little success. once traffic picks up the servers seem to become irresponsive.

 

I like all the db (mysql, ms sql, oracle).

Depending on usage to determine the suitable db for the application.

If large scale volume of usage, better use oracle or ms sql.

For MySql, it is always best fit into small web application.

 

I too agree
"Use it for the area it's good for..."
- Small projects -> mysql
- Large projects -> oracle

 

you can't compare a corporate "world's greatest database software" with a free one

 

Agreed.

Also, you never mentioned PostgreSQL, which IMHO is a very good solution in large projects.

 

Microsoft has a clear strategy to gain market share in the Server space
so SQL Server has been growing there... and Oracle will have a tough time growing in the consumer space... especially since it is much easier to develop (with Visual studio and other tools, and with all docs around and readily available support) for SQL
I believe Oracle is in for a tough time ahead.

I would put my money in SQL Server... but also on MySQL !
the growth will be there I believe
thx

 

Many state agencies are migrating off of Oracle and adopting the .NET server platform to lower cost of ownership, administration, etc. I have used Oracle, SQL Server, and now working with MySQL. Each has its place, but MySQL is not necessarily for small projects. Take a look at the case studies. Many well known companies use MySQL, i.e. Yahoo!, Associated Press, Friendster, iStockPhoto, and many more. Choose what is best.

 

Dont forget about security. MYSQL is good for small project but also has low security (which depends on your host and the passwords you set for the user of the database). Oracle seems good for larger projects but security also is always an issue.

 

well, I believe it is too vague to say MS SQL is less secure or not as secure as others is a bit unfair.
it is of course more prone to problems as anyone can install it and forget the securtiy parts.. just hit next next next

I used to be an Oracle Support Engineer and I have to say ... it is incredible how many people(companies) installed oracle and left the sys password default
so anyone could just login !

well, the same happens with MSSQL , and many people leave the sa password blank

thx

 

@Imrm: I totally disagree with you. I don't know where you are from or for what kind of companies you worked but in my whole career as Oracle warehouse builder consultant & Oracle DBA I never have seen this in any OTAP at one of our clients. Our clients are in public, consumer products, finance, travl & transport & telecom in worldwide markets. Company size difference from 50 -> 1000000 empl. so all kind of RBMS & solutions i have seen.

But! Although as it sounds strange as former oracle consultant and with Oracle's enormous installed base (# RBMS licenses etc.) .... i would also put my money on SQL server by Mickeysoft, so we agree on that. MS has a very keen marketing penetration strategy to implement, marketize and sometimes forces clients to use specific elements. Oracle is falling back on client focus and intimacy and has focussed way to long on their databases instead of client solutions. While MS just makes what we need, simple, quick and make a hell of marketing around it .... and it works. Clients and customers are also willing to swith easy when they can cover long time contracts for a good price.

MS sql server is a stable clean platform the work on. Mysql is far more better for custom software development as webenviroments, intranetsites etc. I love mysql for my hobby, as a proffesional i use Mysql server and I am growned up with Oracle.

But more interesting is where everybody is using the database for. Myself;
1x Oracle --> Business intelligence / data warehousing playground on laptop
2x SQL Server --> on a hp blade server with ms sql server at my work for BI/DWH/data mining
24x mysql --> db's at godaddy for my websites... all nicely seperated. Don't ask about the maintenane

U?

 

As it has been said before, it depends on the size of the project.

As a matter of fact there are benchmarks which prove mysql offers almost the same performances as oracle when it comes to little data volumes (2 go or less) and few users (30 or less).

Besides, the costs entailed by oracle don't lie only in the licence but also in the hardware (RAM, CPU) you need to achieve good performances.

Oracle is indeed a beast, however it is also a memory hog.


The best comparison would be the one made by Charles Phillips, CEO of Oracle :
"We're both in the transportation business. We have a 747, and they have a Toyota."

Marten Mickos, CEO of MySql answered :
"There are many more Toyotas sold than 747s. "Toyota is a very profitable company"

 

because it runs on Java, so on top of a virtual machine. Of course it's slower.