It takes 60mb when not doing anything. At the same time, MySQL only
takes 1.6mb. What makes the difference so great as they're both SQL
servers?

Oh and does PostgreSQL support the features supported in Ms SQL ? (I'm
not talking about Server features such as replication)

ms sql server kicks butt go out and buy some more memory

sql server actually uses ram, mysql relies on disk too much

Have you checked your requests are not creating duplicate temp tables.
(order of Aliased Tables matter in every part of statements, Inner / Outer
Joins). etc.

ms sql --vs -- mysql

If only that was true

We have both ms sql server & mysql acting as large warehouses for highly
optimized Web-based calculation servers.
Some requests extract 100'000's of points (prices, time series data,
volatilities, correlations).

mysql beats mssql hands up.Ram or Not, (Yes UX swaps disk if you don't have
enough RAM!, but even that can be configured in mysql). mysql if MUCH more
efficient in terms of computer resources and speed. (in some specific
instances one order of magnitude!).

On the other hand ms sql beats mysql in terms of user friendliness, stored
procedures .. and views


BRgrds
John


[quoted text, click to view]

sql server wins in uh.. scalability.. also

i dont see mysql anywhere at tpc.org

hahahaha are you serious?

i call google 10,000 db servers not 1 really strong db server

technically; that is called 'scale out' and not 'scale up'.

MySQL doesn't scale??? WTF do you call Google?

[quoted text, click to view]

Only dumbasses put all their eggs in one basket.

[quoted text, click to view]

jesus...

at first you're like 'yeah, google scales' and now you're like 'yeah
who needs to scale up when you can scale out'

you know what that is?

sour grapes??? i mean seriously here
i love open source databases. maybe someday these apps will grow up
and force ms to start taking databases seriously..

i love mysql. it's got a little ways to grow; but it's getting there.

-aaron