Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

ffs, this attitude causes massively more problems than it solves.

I don't think that it causes so many problems to just use MySQL instead of Postgres from the very beginning of a project. I like using Postgres and I understand that I shouldn't care about scaling but if a make a good decision from the very beginning it can't hurt.



I would rather use Postgres and have a RDBMS that is quite strict and migrate data later instead of having a RDBMS that just does what it likes sometimes.

For example, query your table „picture“ with a first column „uuid“ (varchar) with the following query:

SELECT * FROM picture WHERE uuid = 123;

I don‘t know what you expect, I expect the query to fail because a number is not a string. MySQL thinks otherwise.


In Oracle it will fail, but only if uuid has characters that can't be parsed as numbers...


Does that make it better? IMHO, it‘s even worse.


Uber switched because of a very specific problem they had with the internals of Postgres, that was handled differently in MySQL (which I believe is now "solved" anyway).

It's not that MySQL scales better than Postgres, but that Uber hit a particular specific scaling problem that they could solve by switching to MySQL.

You could well use MySQL "because it scales better" and then hit a particular specific problem that would be solved by switching to Postgres.


Is MySQL a general solution to scaling? What if your scaling problem is with writes?


That's why Vitess is so awesome - you can scale writes infinitely. There's not a truly comparable option for Postgres




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: