Forum: Ruby on Rails Not wishing to instigate a DB war, but...

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
8dad1ec4d769734583f45fbbee5cd009?d=identicon&s=25 Jeff Pritchard (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 04:08
Can I get some opinions on which free DB to use with rails for a virtual
server that will eventually be doing lots of heavy database lifting?
Not a lot of heavy duty querying per se.  Think multiple simultaneous
forums and blog sites and the like.

I know each of the different DB possibilities such as MySQL and
PostgreSQL has plus points and minus points.  I'm particularly
interested in picking one that can take the worst beating without
requiring hardware upgrades as often once it is being used by multiple
simultaneous apps with lots of hits per day.

Where is an appropriate place to look for a complete list of supported
DB flavors?

thanks,
jp
3a83969376c805ef5b6042191fdb0ff3?d=identicon&s=25 Andreas S. (andreas)
on 2006-01-10 04:33
Jeff Pritchard wrote:
> Can I get some opinions on which free DB to use with rails for a virtual
> server that will eventually be doing lots of heavy database lifting?
> Not a lot of heavy duty querying per se.  Think multiple simultaneous
> forums and blog sites and the like.
>
> I know each of the different DB possibilities such as MySQL and
> PostgreSQL has plus points and minus points.  I'm particularly
> interested in picking one that can take the worst beating without
> requiring hardware upgrades as often once it is being used by multiple
> simultaneous apps with lots of hits per day.

What is "lots of"?

I recommend MySQL for one reason: the query cache. This can be a huge
advantage especially for web applications, where 99% of the queries are
usually SELECTs. I don't think any of the other supported DBs has a
similar feature. I'm using MySQL for two forums
(http://www.ruby-forum.com and http://www.mikrocontroller.net), a wiki,
a shop and some other stuff, the total database size is 700 MB. With a 3
MB query cache I get a hit rate of 80%. A hit is handled about 2 times
faster than the most simple SELECT.
01d7a451018ac15518f425078ef00c40?d=identicon&s=25 Phillip Hutchings (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 05:27
(Received via mailing list)
On 10/01/2006, at 4:08 PM, Jeff Pritchard wrote:

> simultaneous apps with lots of hits per day.
I recommend PostgreSQL for various reasons, but it really depends on
what you're doing. 'Lots of hits' means nothing, how many is lots?
How did you get the figure? What will those hits be doing? If you're
serving simple forum/blog sites MySQL will work fine, but be
absolutely sure you're using InnoDB - MyISAM sucks at concurrency. If
you're going for a really high volume of customisation per page with
constant inserts (think 20+ per second) PostgreSQL will help more,
it's far better at concurrency, is truly ACID and even supports point-
in-time recovery with sufficient admin knowledge, but it isn't as
easy to use.

For the record, most blogs and forums seem to be MySQL powered these
days. LiveJournal and Wikipedia use MySQL.

--
Phillip Hutchings
phillip.hutchings@sitharus.com
6edd67c92a1dab5eb23fed79f3c18564?d=identicon&s=25 David Heinemeier Hansson (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 05:42
(Received via mailing list)
> For the record, most blogs and forums seem to be MySQL powered these
> days. LiveJournal and Wikipedia use MySQL.

So does Basecamp, Backpack, Ta-da List, Writeboard, and all
forthcoming applications from 37signals. MySQL does a great job of
being an Application Database[1]. PostgreSQL definitely got smarter
chops for being an Integration Database[1]. Find out which database
style you're going to be using before making your choice.

[1] http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/DatabaseStyles.html
--
David Heinemeier Hansson
http://www.loudthinking.com -- Broadcasting Brain
http://www.basecamphq.com   -- Online project management
http://www.backpackit.com   -- Personal information manager
http://www.rubyonrails.com  -- Web-application framework
B84d42a3a5c343f8fc6ab7d7f47fd3f5?d=identicon&s=25 Robby Russell (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 06:40
(Received via mailing list)
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 22:40 -0600, David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:
> So does Basecamp, Backpack, Ta-da List, Writeboard, and all
> forthcoming applications from 37signals. MySQL does a great job of
> being an Application Database[1]. PostgreSQL definitely got smarter
> chops for being an Integration Database[1]. Find out which database
> style you're going to be using before making your choice.
>
> [1] http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/DatabaseStyles.html

Are you suggesting that MySQL is better at being a PostgreSQL for use as
an Application Database?

In both scenarios, we (PLANET ARGON) encourage use of PostgreSQL... and
when it comes down to bigger concern, we prefer the license of
PostgreSQL (which is more similar to Rails) where MySQL is a
dual-license. You also need to consider the long-term legal issues
surrounding your choice.

...but I'm just a PostgreSQL fan. :-)

-Robby

--
/**************************************************************
* Robby Russell, Founder & Executive Director                 *
* PLANET ARGON, LLC | www.planetargon.com                     *
* Ruby on Rails Development, Consulting, and Hosting          *
* Portland, Oregon  | p: 503.351.4730 | f: 815.642.4068       *
* blog: www.robbyonrails.com | book: www.programmingrails.com *
***************************************************************/
A52b0e1c5d982f2512a03c5dbfd033d6?d=identicon&s=25 Dick Davies (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 12:18
(Received via mailing list)
On 10/01/06, Robby Russell <robby.lists@planetargon.com> wrote:

> ...but I'm just a PostgreSQL fan. :-)

no kidding :D

'Me too', although it's only fair to point out that there seem to be
more outstanding ticketson the postgresql
adapter compared to the mysql adapter.


--
Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns
http://number9.hellooperator.net/
01d7a451018ac15518f425078ef00c40?d=identicon&s=25 Phillip Hutchings (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 12:58
(Received via mailing list)
On 10/01/2006, at 6:37 PM, Robby Russell wrote:

>
> ...but I'm just a PostgreSQL fan. :-)

Same here. I used MySQL for 5-6 years and just find PostgreSQL nicer,
especially as this works:

BEGIN;
DROP DATABASE important_table;_backup -- Don't ask how I misplaced
the semicolon. Just don't.
  -- Realise mistake
ROLLBACK;

It's a life saver when you have spider fingers ;)


--
Phillip Hutchings
phillip.hutchings@sitharus.com
8dad1ec4d769734583f45fbbee5cd009?d=identicon&s=25 Jeff Pritchard (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 17:16
Thanks guys. Appreciate the input, and thanks for keeping it civil.  I
was worried I might start WWIII with that question.

Can anybody tell me the proper way to pronounce PostgreSQL?

thanks,
jp


Phillip Hutchings wrote:
> On 10/01/2006, at 6:37 PM, Robby Russell wrote:
>
>>
>> ...but I'm just a PostgreSQL fan. :-)
>
> Same here. I used MySQL for 5-6 years and just find PostgreSQL nicer,
> especially as this works:
>
> BEGIN;
> DROP DATABASE important_table;_backup -- Don't ask how I misplaced
> the semicolon. Just don't.
>   -- Realise mistake
> ROLLBACK;
>
> It's a life saver when you have spider fingers ;)
>
>
> --
> Phillip Hutchings
> phillip.hutchings@sitharus.com
119af50160cabfe1fb6f2f05f5018c64?d=identicon&s=25 James Ludlow (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 17:29
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/10/06, Jeff Pritchard <jp@jeffpritchard.com> wrote:
> Thanks guys. Appreciate the input, and thanks for keeping it civil.  I
> was worried I might start WWIII with that question.
>
> Can anybody tell me the proper way to pronounce PostgreSQL?

post gres queue el
821395fe70906c8290df7f18ac4ac6cf?d=identicon&s=25 Rick Olson (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 17:32
(Received via mailing list)
p - s - q - l   :)

On 1/10/06, James Ludlow <jamesludlow@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
rick
http://techno-weenie.net
Cbff7ea94c9b2c4d5f7cfefd25be9ae2?d=identicon&s=25 Just Someone (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 17:38
(Received via mailing list)
As you can see there are many ways of doing it. Here's a survey about
it:

http://www.postgresql.org/community/survey.33

Bye,

Guy.

Family management on rails - http://www.famundo.com - coming soon!
B84d42a3a5c343f8fc6ab7d7f47fd3f5?d=identicon&s=25 Robby Russell (Guest)
on 2006-01-10 17:41
(Received via mailing list)
Hear it... :-)

http://www.postgresql.org/files/postgresql.mp3


On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 10:30 -0600, Rick Olson wrote:
> > _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
--
/**************************************************************
* Robby Russell, Founder & Executive Director                 *
* PLANET ARGON, LLC | www.planetargon.com                     *
* Ruby on Rails Development, Consulting, and Hosting          *
* Portland, Oregon  | p: 503.351.4730 | f: 815.642.4068       *
* blog: www.robbyonrails.com | book: www.programmingrails.com *
***************************************************************/
D23f436b8e718e80f447712cdac67083?d=identicon&s=25 Amr Malik (amrmalik)
on 2006-01-11 02:31
Phillip Hutchings wrote:
> On 10/01/2006, at 6:37 PM, Robby Russell wrote:
>
> BEGIN;
> DROP DATABASE important_table;_backup -- Don't ask how I misplaced
> the semicolon. Just don't.
>   -- Realise mistake
> ROLLBACK;

DB Drops are logged in PGSQL? did u mean 'Drop Table' ?

-Amr
81194a50c0f9bd95d7832a77fdf371bd?d=identicon&s=25 csn (Guest)
on 2006-01-11 02:41
Robby Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 22:40 -0600, David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:
>> So does Basecamp, Backpack, Ta-da List, Writeboard, and all
>> forthcoming applications from 37signals. MySQL does a great job of
>> being an Application Database[1]. PostgreSQL definitely got smarter
>> chops for being an Integration Database[1]. Find out which database
>> style you're going to be using before making your choice.
>>
>> [1] http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/DatabaseStyles.html
>
> Are you suggesting that MySQL is better at being a PostgreSQL for use as
> an Application Database?
>
> In both scenarios, we (PLANET ARGON) encourage use of PostgreSQL... and
> when it comes down to bigger concern, we prefer the license of
> PostgreSQL (which is more similar to Rails) where MySQL is a
> dual-license. You also need to consider the long-term legal issues
> surrounding your choice.
>
> ...but I'm just a PostgreSQL fan. :-)
>
> -Robby
>
> --
> /**************************************************************
> * Robby Russell, Founder & Executive Director                 *
> * PLANET ARGON, LLC | www.planetargon.com                     *
> * Ruby on Rails Development, Consulting, and Hosting          *
> * Portland, Oregon  | p: 503.351.4730 | f: 815.642.4068       *
> * blog: www.robbyonrails.com | book: www.programmingrails.com *
> ***************************************************************/


Same here. I switched from MySQL (after years of use) to PostgreSQL
about two years ago and haven't encountered a single situation where I'd
rather use MySQL. Well, except of course when having to accommodate apps
that are MySQL-centric (like Wordpress).

csn
01d7a451018ac15518f425078ef00c40?d=identicon&s=25 Phillip Hutchings (Guest)
on 2006-01-11 05:46
(Received via mailing list)
On 11/01/2006, at 2:31 PM, Amr Malik wrote:

> Phillip Hutchings wrote:
>> On 10/01/2006, at 6:37 PM, Robby Russell wrote:
>>
>> BEGIN;
>> DROP DATABASE important_table;_backup -- Don't ask how I misplaced
>> the semicolon. Just don't.
>>   -- Realise mistake
>> ROLLBACK;
>
> DB Drops are logged in PGSQL? did u mean 'Drop Table' ?

Hah, yes I did. PostgreSQL won't let you DROP DATABASE in a
transaction anyway, nice save ;) Another reason not to write SQL when
you've taken the day off sick...


--
Phillip Hutchings
phillip.hutchings@sitharus.com
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.