Re: sql's

Reading this reminded my of a VERY POPULAR Operting System. Guess, guess!!! Saludos... :-) On Jue 27 Dic 2001 16:30, you wrote: > I'll come in the discussion with an extra topic: ³how to show the ignorant > a good product². > > If you go to the first thing you see is: > ³

Re: sql's

At 04:30 PM 12/27/2001 -0300, you wrote: >I'll come in the discussion with an extra topic: ³how to show the ignorant a >good product². [snip] >If you go to the first thing you see is a list >of mirror sites. [snip] >The information on PostgreSQL is more hidden. The us

Re: sql's

I'll come in the discussion with an extra topic: ³how to show the ignorant a good product². If you go to the first thing you see is: ³MySQL is the world's most popular Open Source Database, designed for speed, power and precision in mission critical, heavy load use. MySQL

Re: sql's

David Talkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote: > > >> Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I am a > >> newbie to both. Which should I use? > > > >PostgreSQL. You want subqueries, you want foreign keys, you want triggers. > > With all

Re: sql's

On Vie 21 Dic 2001 19:43, you wrote: > > The OP won't go wrong with either one, but I suspect she'll find more > documentation for MySQL than for PostgreSQL, which might be a > significant consideration. Sorry David, but I think you're wrong. The extra documentation yo can find on MySQL speaks o

Re: sql's

On Vie 21 Dic 2001 17:21, you wrote: > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I > > am a newbie to both. Which should I use? > > PostgreSQL. You want subqueries, you want foreign keys, you want triggers. Ohh, I jus

Re: sql's

On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Brian Ashe wrote: > > The OP won't go wrong with either one, but I suspect she'll find more > > documentation for MySQL than for PostgreSQL, which might be a > > significant consideration. > > I find this highly inaccurate. The reason being that I believe there is so > much

Re: sql's

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Ashe wrote: >> The OP won't go wrong with either one, but I suspect she'll find more >> documentation for MySQL than for PostgreSQL, which might be a >> significant consideration. > >I find this highly inaccurate. The reason being that I believ

Re: sql's

On Friday 21 December 2001 05:43, you babbled something about: > Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote: > >> Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I > >> am a newbie to both. Which should I use? > > > >PostgreSQL. You want subqueries, you want foreign keys, you want triggers.

Re: sql's

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote: >> Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I am a >> newbie to both. Which should I use? > >PostgreSQL. You want subqueries, you want foreign keys, you want triggers. With all due respect, T

Re: sql's

"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I am a > newbie to both. Which should I use? PostgreSQL. You want subqueries, you want foreign keys, you want triggers. -- Trond Eivind Glomsrød Red Hat, Inc.

Re: sql's

On Fri, 2001-12-21 at 06:56, Leonard den Ottolander wrote: > Hi Linda, > > Anthony wrote: > > > If you can use a simpler implementation that excels on reads, > > use MySQL. > > > > I prefer PostgreSQL because it has everything I'll need and the latest > > versions are also fast e

Re: sql's

Hi Linda, Anthony wrote: > If you can use a simpler implementation that excels on reads, > use MySQL. > > I prefer PostgreSQL because it has everything I'll need and the latest > versions are also fast enough that speed is not an issue. So if you just need to access a few tab

Re: sql's

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone have an opinion on using either PostgreSQL or MySQL on RH 7.1? I am a > newbie to both. Which should I use? That depends on what you need. There are lots of opion pieces about this posted around the 'Net. Generally, if you need a more complete SQL implementatio