Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by oftenwrong on Saturday February 27, 2021 @06:32AM
(#26284172)
Schemas are similar to databases in mysql. They serve as a namespace. In mysql you can have a database `foo` and a table `foo.bar`. In postgres you can have a schema `foo` and a table `foo.bar`. In postgres you can have multiple databases in a cluster, and multiple schemas within each of those databases.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by eznzt on Saturday February 27, 2021 @07:11AM
(#26284333)
What you are basically saying is that yes, they are much more complex.
Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by rleigh on Saturday February 27, 2021 @07:40AM
(#26284480)
They are not complex, and they are entirely optional. They are just a namespace. You are free to never, ever use them.
For a company the size of Uber, I don't think spending five minutes reading the documentation for createuser is a significant burden to deployment. PostgreSQL is very easy to deploy.
Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by desas on Saturday February 27, 2021 @07:23AM
(#26284392)
It's another layer, you don't have to use it. If you pretend schemas don't exist you basically never know they do, unless you go looking for complexity in the postgres bowels.
Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by Tostino on Saturday February 27, 2021 @08:04AM
(#26284610)
To be honest, it's better to think of MySQL db = Postgres schema, because I'm MySQL you can do cross db queries and there is no intermediary schema level, and in Postgres you can do cross schema queries, but not cross db queries.
Re:Why Uber Engineering Switched from Postgres to MySQL (2016)
by chris_wot on Saturday February 27, 2021 @08:23AM
(#26284692)
No, what you mistake for "complexity" seems to be your general unfamiliarity of what a schema is. In fact, when you understand what schemas are, then it actually makes a lot more sense.