billl at mtd-inc.com
Sun May 28 14:03:37 EDT 2006
Yeah, I know MySQL can handle some big tasks, my statement was more
If your a small shop with one guy doing everything your gonna use what
is easy to implement and/or cheap.
With our DB needs mostly being met by Access 2003, the only need for a
DB server is to support eGroupware.
I think it's actually a pretty good statement about MySQL, that the
one-man-IT-dept. can use it and call it easy, and Wikipedia can use it
to handle 8.4Gb. The truth be told, I wouldn't shy away from MySQL if
our needs grow to require a business critical DB backend. I would
definetely make sure I had good support for it though, but that goes for
Tim Schmidt wrote:
> Damn. Forgot the link: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesDatabaseSize.htm
> On 5/27/06, Tim Schmidt <timschmidt at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/26/06, Bill Littlejohn <billl at mtd-inc.com> wrote:
>>> We're not big enough to use Oracle, or in fact any DBS bigger than MSDE
>>> or MySQL.
>> So... nothing bigger than the 8.4Gb Wikipedia is managing?
>> Good to know.
> grlug mailing list
> grlug at grlug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the grlug