A nice EnterpriseDB replacement of MySQL
I’m going to praise EnterpriseDB’s marketing communications twice in two blog posts, because I really liked some of the crunch they put into a press release announcing a MySQL replacement at FortiusOne. To wit (emphasis mine):
The PostGIS geospatial extensions to PostgreSQL played a key role in FortiusOne’s selection of EnterpriseDB Advanced Server, a PostgreSQL-based solution, and dramatically improved performance. FortiusOne needed to run complex spatial queries against large datasets quickly and efficiently, and found the MySQL spatial extensions to be far less complete and comprehensive than PostGIS. EnterpriseDB Advanced Server processes some of GeoCommons’ database-intensive rendering requests in one-thirtieth of the time required by MySQL. During peak loads, GeoCommons processes more than one hundred thousand complex requests per hour, requiring true enterprise-class performance and scalability.
Another major factor in FortiusOne’s replacement of MySQL with EnterpriseDB Advanced Server was the company’s need for advanced partitioning, custom triggers, and functional indexing. EnterpriseDB’s advanced partitioning capabilities instantly enabled linear performance, even with tables having billions of rows.
Now 100,000 queries/hour isn’t all that much — at least not for a serious DBMS — unless those queries are even more “complex” than I’m guessing. And MySQL has some kind of trigger support. Still, that level of detail sure helps us understand what the win was all about, doesn’t it? It was muuch more informative than the usual pabulum-filled customer win press release, which is perhaps why Lewis Cunningham blogged about it, and certainly is why I did.
Comments
10 Responses to “A nice EnterpriseDB replacement of MySQL”
Leave a Reply
Careful, Curt. We’re gonna start blushing. 😉
Am I missing something? Wasn’t this from 2 months ago?
You’re quite correct Jay, as per the date on the press release.
CAM
I suspect that Jay Pipes is in real pain every time he reads these kinds of posts. Probably, if he’d offer his services to a real database maker, he wouldn’t have to justify and fight these news, a real slap in mysql ab’s face (this post is good news in my opinion).
I would dare to compare Jay with Goebbels: good at what he’s doing (Goebbels was brilliant though, malefic but brilliant), but fighting for a lost cause.
Cheers!
Godwin’s Law has something unfavorable to say about posts like yours, gigiduru.
CAM
Yeah, yeah, and probably you don’t how to read between the lines.
I’m not saying anything bad about EnterpriseDB, nor disputing the basis of the claims from EnterpriseDB. I was just pointing out that the release was quite a while ago.
My stance, and I’ve always said this, is “right tool for the right job”. EnterpriseDB (and MySQL, PostgreSQL, Oracle, MS SQL Server, DB2, SQLite) are great and fine tools, for particular purposes. Clearly, each tool has strengths and weaknesses. And, I see no problem in vendors emphasizing the strengths of their products. What I generally take issue with is when misinformation is spread, and I try to correct myths and misinformation when I see it (and I do so for both MYSQL *and* PostgreSQL).
In the case of the press release in question, there’s nothing particularly wrong with it, save for a little marketing-hype against MySQL — the “hit the wall” thingie. It’s true that GIS extensions in PostGIS are more flexible and powerful than MySQL’s currently (something I hope to see progress on!). It’s true that MySQL does not support functional indexes. So, sure, if the customer’s requirements were for powerful GIS and functional indexes, EnterpriseDB may have been the best tool for the job. As in all cases, each RDBMS solution should be investigated thoroughly (and in an objective fashion) to ensure the solution meets the applications needs.
Cheers,
Jay
@gigiduru: I have neither the time nor inclination to respond to that.
Oh Jay, please, don’t play the “I’m a saint” card!!! You knew very well that by pointing that news is kinda old, you’re aiming to downplay its impact. For me, MySQL shittines is hot news everyday I hit the console. I don’t cease to be amazed in how many ways a product can hit down hard people’s expectations!
And to respond to your little “right tool for the right job” sentence: there’s no right job for mysql unless it’s a kinder garden class for familiarize toddlers with DO’s and DON’T’s in a database. Anything more than that, you stumble either on myisam corruption or lack of real concurrency for innodb, just to mention few here.
And speaking about hype, why don’t you point our attention to hype that SURROUNDS this piece of crap called MySQL giving it 90% of the traction?! The rest of 10% is given by the wondered whiz kiddies, until they hit that wall you mentioned.
And how come postgresql remained a really free STRONG product, definitely implementing the principles of a solid database in about the same amount of time. Given the money MySQL AB is making from training/consulting/licenses the mysql product should have surpassed PostgreSQL in many ways by now, trying to make MySQL more RELIABLE, less error prone and should have had a real road map with features implemented all the way, not just half baked. But it didn’t happen, instead MySQL have gave the control to marketing geniuses; geniuses in the real sense – after all, who else would be capable to bring such a s..y product in such nice looking wrap and blow away peoples’ minds?
And guess what? I don’t really think postgresql needs/have any public relations guy. That database software speaks for itself.
A former MySQL fan that points out your lack of objectivity.
P.S. I didn’t expect any logical answer from your side given the Goebbels comparison. But definitely I got your attention. Do yourself a good by getting real and don’t try anymore to bring favorable argument pro auto_increment keys against sequences. That was really lame, you stepped on a minefield.
@gigiduru: Do you have some kind of separate history here you’re fretting over? Jay Pipes is posting using his full name, linking to his website just in case you might not already know his association with MySql. So he’s not pretending to be an uninvolved party — but still everything he said was reasonable to the extreme.
I’ve used Oracle and DB2 more than MySQL personally — though I’ve used it as well, plus others — and was interested in the press release, because it’s good to know what the solid options are (and their strengths and weaknesses).
Obviously you’re “talking trash” about MySQL, but it’s silly. You know Slashdot uses MySQL, right? It’s a serious option, if your needs match up with its strengths.
@Rob:
1. You gave me the answer yourself: you didn’t use too much this MySQL piece of software (I’ll avoid from now on to call it a database). Start using it in a REAL busy corporate environment for, let’s say, a year. After that, why don’t we meet online and I’ll patiently listen for your precious opinions. I’ll do this favour to you, just because you’re coming from Oracle/DB2 world. After all, this is what MySQL AB touts about is software: it’s enterprise ready. This statement is all over their website.
2. If you’d take your head of the ground and look around you, companies bigger than this Slashdot micro website are using mysql: Yahoo, Google, Facebook. The best example would be Google. They took the least prone to defects version, 4.0.26, and started to patch it to reach the desired functionality. Look on their projects page for details. BUT the whole point is, how exactly are these companies using MySQL, what’s the mindset around this database? The answer is simple: they’re treating every single machine as DISPOSABLE, because from the start, engineers know that cannot rely on MySQL to guarantee data/uptime.
Now, can you answer me if you treated your powerhouse machines running Solaris/Oracle as disposable? Ask yourself if postgresql users are doing this, and I’m giving this example because Postgresql is REALLY open source. Look and read between the lines dude, read between the lines.
Much of the MySQL traction is given by the so-called easiness in usage. But when you need to make some real work, you hit some walls and hit them hard: lack of transaction support unless your using Innodb; oh wait, but if you start using innodb you can’t use full text indexes and hit some caps with scalability/thread concurrency. If you want full text search you got to have that total flop called myisam; having myisam makes you prone to table corruption. What normal sane people would put a database that corrupts its underlying tables, unable to GUARANTEE data consistency?
I don’t wanna stick my hands in other storage engines too, because it would be a long discussion. As indoctrinated as I see you are, it would probably be wasted time.
3. Having reached the third point in discussion, about this dude, Jay Pipes, I didn’t have anything against him whatsoever. Up to a point where I found an forum discussion on a postgresql website, where he had the nerve to take on the issue with auto_increment keys, being more efficient to have an auto increment key on a table than to deal with a sequence. Everybody knows that in solving a complex problem, the “Divide et Impera” principle is the path to go, namely separate the complex problem in smaller subproblems and solve them individually. In this case, separating the consecutive numbers generation system from the table, in oracle/postgresql, it was a real help for programmers/dba to control this aspect of synthetic/surrogate primary keys. But no, this dude Jay Pipes (I don’t think he had/has real programmer/dba experience) started supporting with flawed arguments MySQL’s f’ed implementation. And he put some passion too in that argument, therefore drawing my attention on his total lack of objectivity. A guy like this, in his position, should see the grander schema of things and weigh in all the possibilities because he has to maintain his credibility and impose respect through well balanced opinions. He failed miserably. His position at MySQL AB is North American Community Relations Manager.
Him being in that position makes him a dangerous person in ruining the balance of pros and cons opinions on internet about MySQL. After all, his primary job is propaganda. Hence my forced comparison. If you have a problem with it – move on and get over it, you’re not the first, you won’t be the last.
P.S. “It’s a serious option, if your needs match up with its strengths”
— Knowing that you’re coming from Oracle/DB2 world, this statements still gets me… Talk to the webmaster to take it out, for your own good. You need to maintain your DBA credibility.