<story><title>Making MySQL Better at GitHub</title><url>https://github.com/blog/1880-making-mysql-better-at-github</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>calinet6</author><text>Or better, more solid relational options like Postgres...&lt;p&gt;Honestly, is there any reason to use MySQL over Postgres at this point? Or is it sort of six of one half a dozen of the other as long as the data model is decent?</text></item><item><author>DigitalSea</author><text>Anyone else disappointed the post didn&amp;#x27;t go into all that much detail? Scaling databases is hard if you&amp;#x27;re not privileged enough to have access to large pools of money to hire good DBA&amp;#x27;s.&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, I would love to see companies like Github opening up their database schemas to the public with mock data. Scaling is one aspect, but the best thing you can do in the beginning is to create a solid schema (normalise, denormalise...) it would be interesting to see what Github uses and why. Still awesome to see MySQL being the choice most large companies like Github choose in the face of new and untested NoSQL databases like MongoDB.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>cwyers</author><text>INSERT IGNORE and REPLACE are two pretty good reasons, in my opinion. Postgres also doesn&amp;#x27;t have real table partitioning. Yes, you can sorta kinda hack around the first with stored procs. And yes, you can do something that looks a lot like partitioned tables using table inheritance. And yes, Postgres now has replication support, if you don&amp;#x27;t mind using only row-based replication (MySQL lets you choose between row-based and statement-based replication) among other tradeoffs.&lt;p&gt;So yeah, Postgres is a better relational database than MySQL, if you ignore all the things MySQL does better. Another great thing about Postgres is that whenever a site like Hacker News gets a thread about MySQL, you get a bunch of people asking why you aren&amp;#x27;t using Postgres instead, and then whenever you try and answer the question you get a bunch of Postgres users to tell you you&amp;#x27;re wrong or that the features you care about don&amp;#x27;t matter (or that they&amp;#x27;re hard to implement, which... this is my problem why?) or that Postgres really has replication that&amp;#x27;s as good as MySQL&amp;#x27;s this time we pinky swear. So most MySQL users get a first impression of Postgres&amp;#x27; user community that is quite frankly rather unfavorable.&lt;p&gt;Oh, and MySQL has a lot more third-party documentation, tooling and support available.</text></comment>
<story><title>Making MySQL Better at GitHub</title><url>https://github.com/blog/1880-making-mysql-better-at-github</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>calinet6</author><text>Or better, more solid relational options like Postgres...&lt;p&gt;Honestly, is there any reason to use MySQL over Postgres at this point? Or is it sort of six of one half a dozen of the other as long as the data model is decent?</text></item><item><author>DigitalSea</author><text>Anyone else disappointed the post didn&amp;#x27;t go into all that much detail? Scaling databases is hard if you&amp;#x27;re not privileged enough to have access to large pools of money to hire good DBA&amp;#x27;s.&lt;p&gt;Interestingly, I would love to see companies like Github opening up their database schemas to the public with mock data. Scaling is one aspect, but the best thing you can do in the beginning is to create a solid schema (normalise, denormalise...) it would be interesting to see what Github uses and why. Still awesome to see MySQL being the choice most large companies like Github choose in the face of new and untested NoSQL databases like MongoDB.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>markwatson</author><text>We chose MySQL where I work only because it&amp;#x27;s easier to hire people with a lot of MySQL knowledge. Technical reasons aren&amp;#x27;t the only ones when deciding what software&amp;#x2F;framework&amp;#x2F;libraries to use.</text></comment>