Windows DBMS > MySQL Community Edition VS SQL Server

[TechBoyJK]

Looking to deploy an app that I've built using SQL Server 2008.

Licensing is expensive for SQL Server, especially when you need replication, etc.

It's not that complicated of a DB honestly.. Mostly straightforward tables, indexes, etc.

Thinking it'd be pretty easy to port over to mySQL.

Thoughts? Performance? Reliability?

 

[Rangoric]

Would Sql Express work? I know SQL Express is free, and can work with a DB up to 2GB.

Just as an option.

 

[WannaFly]

If you've designed it for MSSQL, SQL express will probably with with little to no changes. There's a newer version/technology coming out, or maybe its out, but I cannot remember the name - that is a completely standalone DB, no install needed. Similar to access but uses MSSQL technology.

A lot of it has to do with your app: where it will be hosted, how many clients will connect, if there are advanced services (reporting, SSIS).

 

[Markbnj]

It depends on the size of the database and which features you've used. That will drive what changes at the db level, and whether you need client side changes as well.

I've built dbs on both platforms, but I've never moved one between them. I think tables and indexes would port with little effort. There might be some help here:

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/migration-toolkit/en/

If you're creating stored procs or user-defined functions you may have more changes to make. Also, if you're using any of the proprietary SQL server globals like @@rowcount or @@identity the MySql method of getting to this same information is different and usually more cumbersome.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Would Sql Express work? I know SQL Express is free, and can work with a DB up to 2GB.

Just as an option.

No, it wouldn't. Well, it would to start, but not really. Trying to build with redundancy in mind and features like replication aren't available until you use SQL Server Enterprise.

And because of MS's new SQL server licensing rules, having a million users of your web app being funneled through SQL via a single IIS connection doesn't count as 1 user, it counts as a million. (no more middleware user counts).

Because of this, if you're going to host a site with a lot of users, you essentially have to get a 'per cpu' license for SQL Server Enterprise. I could use 'web edition' which is per CPU licensing, but that doesn't offer replication.

$20K to buy a '1 cpu' license for SQL Server enterprise.

http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/Mic...e/2077261.aspx

So if I want to host the DB on a dual cpu server.. $40k.

And if it grows past that?? more $$$$

It seems that I could use that money to pay a mySQL admin make up for my shortcomings since I really only know SQL Server.

 

[KLin]

No, it wouldn't. Well, it would to start, but not really. Trying to build with redundancy in mind and features like replication aren't available until you use SQL Server Enterprise.

And because of MS's new SQL server licensing rules, having a million users of your web app being funneled through SQL via a single IIS connection doesn't count as 1 user, it counts as a million. (no more middleware user counts).

Because of this, if you're going to host a site with a lot of users, you essentially have to get a 'per cpu' license for SQL Server Enterprise. I could use 'web edition' which is per CPU licensing, but that doesn't offer replication.

$20K to buy a '1 cpu' license for SQL Server enterprise.

http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/Mic...e/2077261.aspx

So if I want to host the DB on a dual cpu server.. $40k.

And if it grows past that?? more $$$$

It seems that I could use that money to pay a mySQL admin make up for my shortcomings since I really only know SQL Server.

SQL Replication is available in SQL Standard and Workgroup editions.

 

[velvetpants]

Why not postgresql? It's pure awesome and completely free.

I've had very frustrating experiences with mysql. Stored procedures and triggers are a joke and I've had to do more workarounds with it then anything.

Granted I have no experience with anything close to enterprise level. Mostly personal projects, but I've switched all my db related stuff to pgsql and it's a like riding down a chocolate mountain on skis made of rainbows compared to mysql (which is more like going down a jagged icy cliff banging your balls into every rock on the way).

 

[Cogman]

Why not postgresql? It's pure awesome and completely free.

I've had very frustrating experiences with mysql. Stored procedures and triggers are a joke and I've had to do more workarounds with it then anything.

Granted I have no experience with anything close to enterprise level. Mostly personal projects, but I've switched all my db related stuff to pgsql and it's a like riding down a chocolate mountain on skis made of rainbows compared to mysql (which is more like going down a jagged icy cliff banging your balls into every rock on the way).

I have to agree about not choosing MySQL. It looks like Oracle's movement towards making MySQL totally worthless has already begun (they now have a payed enterprise edition with special commercial plugins).

The pain of switching is going to very much depend on how much non-standard SQL you use. Most SQL databases have good implementations of the standards, it is the stuff outside where things start getting complex.

Non-standard things include stuff like stored procedures, special functions (like, getting the last id inserted), etc.

 

[beginner99]

The pain of switching is going to very much depend on how much non-standard SQL you use. Most SQL databases have good implementations of the standards, it is the stuff outside where things start getting complex.

Non-standard things include stuff like stored procedures, special functions (like, getting the last id inserted), etc.

Yeah and it's the commercial stuff that shines with not supporting certain standards and implementing their own weird stuff. Oracle is especially good at that.

I would choose PostgreSQL over MySQL too.

 

[Broheim]

do you really need a relational database? it's obviously a bit late in the game but have you given noSQL a thought, I'm a big fan of mongoDB.