[CLUE-Tech] Database Performance Comparison

[Chris K. Chew]

Yeah, but too bad MySQL isn't "unbreakable".  Heeheh.

Speaking of this, I read a teaser on one of the security focus mailing lists
that a group was about to announce some vulnerabilities for the unbreakable
Oracle 9 database, but nothing further ever came out (that I noticed,
anyways).  Has anybody heard anything more of interest?

This is a bit of change of subject, but it might still fall under "Database
Performance Comparison".

Thanks,

ck

-----Original Message-----
From: clue-tech-admin at clue.denver.co.us
[mailto:clue-tech-admin at clue.denver.co.us]On Behalf Of Jeffery Cann
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 6:25 PM
To: clue-tech at clue.denver.co.us
Subject: Re: [CLUE-Tech] Database Performance Comparison


Gotta love that MySQL performs as well as Oracle 9i and BOTH are twice as
fast as MS-SQL.

Is anyone surprized?  I would love to hear Microsloths take on the report.

Jeff

On Monday 25 February 2002 02:02 pm, David L. Willson wrote:
> SQL Server 2000 did great on every chart where there were no other
> databases.
> http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=708&a=23115,00.asp
>
> David L. Willson
> MCSE, MCP+I, A+, Network+
> DLWillson at TheGeek.NU
> http://TheGeek.NU
> (303) 795-8548
>
> _______________________________________________
> CLUE-Tech mailing list
> CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us
> http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech
_______________________________________________
CLUE-Tech mailing list
CLUE-Tech at clue.denver.co.us
http://clue.denver.co.us/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech