Databases

By layout and organization, MYSQL is an RDBMS, but not at the level one would want in a large scale enterprise system - yet. Last time I looked (last winter), by my notes it was missing views, stored procedures (?), userdefined functions, some types of joins, and full transactional support.

Most web apps, short of large scale enterprise apps, won't care about any of that except perhaps the stored procs and views. For the typical "flat" collection of tables found in may web apps, MYSQL is faster than MSSQL. MSSQL is more reliable (for db related faults), but includes more overhead to get that reliability. Bad sql and bad db handling in the code will hut performance much more than your choice of an RDBMS.

There's a myth that MYSQL is free. It is, but only for personal use or for non profit orgs. Any other use, including bundling it in an app you sell - e.g. desktop/lan/private web server/reseller web server - or offering it as part of a web hosting package requires payment of a $400 license fee.

I agree with the observation about PostGreSQL being better than MYSQL, but some of the commericial flavors of MYSQL are prety good also.

If I were to deploy a commerical app that expected under 5K db hits per day, I'd look at MSDE. Right now, it's not the snap to deploy that Access is, but MS has committed to move it in that direction. I'd expect to see Access go away in the near future.

One analogy I read about MSDE and it's throttled version of MSSQL was that it could run all week servicing a Human Resources DB for a company with 1000 people. But, when they all hit it just before 5 on friday to do their time sheets, it'll go down the tubes.

Bluefrog wrote: [Access is a waste of time for anything except very small databases. Great for personal contacts and CD collections, and blah blah.

I'd like to clear this one up as well as its simply not true.  Access has been and continues to be an effective solution for corporations around the world.  It is the most widely used database in the world.

This is due to the fact that you have a preinstalled front-end on all machines that have office, as most corporations do.

Its quite simply the easiest and cheapest method of distributing a solution to multiple users that require a complex front-end. Its form and report designer is still among the best on the market. It replication capabilities can be effective, although a little buggy, and its integration with SQL Server for large data stored through Access Data Pages is becoming popular.

A properly designed Access solution can handle multiple users and reasonably large data-stores, well in excess of CD collections requirements.

Its not the answer for every situation, such as a back-end in a web application and may become obsolete in the future when web browsers can offer the same functionality as real-time forms, but thats a long time away.

Sorry, but I cringe when I see comments such as these.

Cheers,
Andrew

I also would not call Access (with Jet 4.0) a waste of time. It has its uses. Rapid development and deployment is one of it's best features and a millstone around the neck of the Jet engine.

As the entry level product for using DB's, a lot of very bad newbie code gets written because the product is forgiving. I've seen some impressive apps serving 20-50 people developed by people who know what they're doing.

On the web, Access/Jet is very suitable for the majority of personal (including personal forums) and small business sites. Although it doesn't scale well, it also doesn't break.