Differences between MySQL and SQL Server [closed]

Answer 1

@abdu

The main thing I've found that MySQL has over MSSQL is timezone support - the ability to nicely change between timezones, respecting daylight savings is fantastic.

Compare this:

mysql> SELECT CONVERT_TZ('2008-04-01 12:00:00', 'UTC', 'America/Los_Angeles');
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| CONVERT_TZ('2008-04-01 12:00:00', 'UTC', 'America/Los_Angeles') |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2008-04-01 05:00:00                                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+

to the contortions involved at this answer.

As for the 'easier to use' comment, I would say that the point is that they are different, and if you know one, there will be an overhead in learning the other.

Answer 2

Spending some time working with MySQL from the MSSQL to MySQL syntax POV I kept finding myself limited in what I could do.

There are bizzare limits on updating a table while refrencing the same table during an update.

Additionally UPDATE FROM does not work and last time I checked they don't support the Oracle MERGE INTO syntax either. This was a show stopper for me and I stopped thinking I would get anywhere with MySQL after that.

Answer 3

Anyone have any good experience with a "port" of a database from SQL Server to MySQL?

This should be fairly painful! I switched versions of MySQL from 4.x to 5.x and various statements wouldn't work anymore as they used to. The query analyzer was "improved" so statements which previously were tuned for performance would not work anymore as expected.

The lesson learned from working with a 500GB MySQL database: It's a subtle topic and anything else but trivial!

Answer 4

Everything in MySQL seems to be done closer to the metal than in MSSQL, And the documentation treats it that way. Especially for optimization, you'll need to understand how indexes, system configuration, and the optimizer interact under various circumstances.

The "optimizer" is more a parser. In MSSQL your query plan is often a surprise (usually good, sometimes not). In MySQL, it pretty much does what you asked it to do, the way you expected it to. Which means you yourself need to have a deep understanding of the various ways it might be done.

Not built around a good TRANSACTION model (default MyISAM engine).

File-system setup is your problem.

All the database configuration is your problem - especially various cache sizes.

Sometimes it seems best to think of it as an ad-hoc, glorified isam. Codd and Date don't carry much weight here. They would say it with no embarrassment.

Answer 5

@Cebjyre. The IDE whether Enterprise Manager or Management Studio is better than anything I have seen so far for MySQL. I say 'easier to use' because I can do many things in MSSQL where MySQL has no counterparts. In MySQL I have no idea how to tune the queries by simply looking at the query plan or looking at the statistics. The index tuning wizard in MSSQL takes most of the guess work on what indexes are missing or misplaced.

One shortcoming of MySQL is there's no max size for a database. The database would just increase in size till it fills up the disk. Imagine if this disk is sharing databases with other users and suddenly all of their queries are failing because their databases can't grow. I have reported this issue to MySQL long time ago. I don't think it's fixed yet.

Answer 6

Frankly, I can't find a single reason to use MySQL rather than MSSQL. The issue before used to be cost but SQL Server 2005 Express is free and there are lots of web hosting companies which offer full hosting with sql server for less than $5.00 a month.

MSSQL is easier to use and has many features which do not exist in MySQL.