Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Maybe I've had the misfortune to work at companies that were especially bad at MySQL, or maybe I'm just a Bad Programmer (actually that's probably it), but I've never worked on a project using MySQL that didn't have issues which could have been resolved by switching to Postgres.

The first time you need to run a DDL statement on live data (usually: "2.sql"), you'll be thankful for transactions. The places where Postgres shines aren't exactly uncommon situations.




MySQL has transactions. MyISAM doesn’t, but the apples to apples comparison would be InnoDB, right?


MySQL doesn't have transactions for DDL (i.e. alter table ), which Postgres does. This is very handy for migrations, as you can modify columns and update data in the same transaction and rollback if things go awry.


MySQL has lots of features, which don't work in specific cases you will likely encounter some day. This is the case very frequently (and of course this is also the case with transactions). If nothing quite works as you expect, I'd say it falls in the category of a "newb trap". Maybe it would behove us to pick the options that have the lowest amount of those.




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

Search: