This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Subject: RE: PgSQL DBD vs MySQL DBD
From: Gary Stainburn <gary.stainburn@ringways.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 15:22:08 +0100
Original Message-----
From: Tseng, Joe [SMTP:Joe.Tseng@digex.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 2:43 PM
To: 'dbi-users@isc.org'
Subject: PgSQL DBD vs MySQL DBD
>I was just wondering if the PgSQL DBD is stable enough to be used for
>mission-critical applications. And does it support all the functions of
>PgSQL? The reason I ask is that I currently use MySQL and it lacks some
>features I wish to utilize; however I would obviously stay where I am if the
>PgSQL DBD is not quite there yet.
>
The short answer is yes.
I use it for cgi based database use for a number of applications as well
as feeding a database from a data capture unit. The data capture system
runs 24x7 without problems.
I don't do complicated SQL, but in theory, the fact that you are using
DBI/DBD should not matter. If Postgresql supports it, then it should work
through DBDPg as this simply provides the connection.
===
Subject: Re: PgSQL DBD vs MySQL DBD
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Cristi=E1n_Mej=EDa_=28ECOFOR=29=22?= <ecofor@mail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 10:59:42 -0400
Joe:
For me Pg works fine in several mission-critical apps., even in
remote mode inside the largest WAN of the country (Chile a thin but very
long country!!).
The machines are working since beginning of 1999 and some of this
are working withot interruption, collecting info and writing several times
a day into a larger DB (Oracle). Even when the network fails, the only
thing I get is error logs, and then the system resume their work
automatically.
The machines (K6 300MHtz, 16Mbytes RAM, 4GBytes HDD, without
monitor, keyboard) are using Linux RH6.0 and the versions of Pg., Perl, DBD
and DBI that was available at this time (beginning of 1999) without any
complication or complain !!
===