MySQL 5.0 is the most ambitious release in MySQL's history. MySQL 5.0 delivers the enterprise features the community has been asking for, including Stored Procedures, Triggers, Views, Information Schema, XA Distributed Transactions, and new Storage Engines. We also added Strict SQL Mode to eliminate some of the ‘Gotchas’. Plus, MySQL 5.0 builds on our reputation for Reliability, Performance, and Ease of Use.
More information and how to use the new features found at the MySQL developers site:
http://dev.mysql.com/

Download mirrors found here: http://dev.mysql.com/downloads/mysql/5.0.html<

Interesting before SQL Server 2005 :) Will see what's up with those two :)<

Funky, will have to check it out when I have a bit of time. Thanks, Davio
<

Originally posted by SiSL
Interesting before SQL Server 2005 :) Will see what's up with those two :)

There is no possible comparison between them.
As the post says, they are now offering entreprise features, that have been available in SQL Server for quite some time. The new features in SQL Server 2005 have nothing to do with this...<

But which one would you rather use ? <

That really depends on the purpose.

I spent the whole saturday moving a database from MSDE to MySQL. Several problems occurred, including problems with character conversions. Moving this from Access to SQL Server is a problem free operation, with MySQL, even with the tools provided by the MySQL developers, is a much troublesome experience, IMVHO, and I'm not only considering this experience.
It's quite common for export / import tools to fail without so much as warning, for example, specially when you use extended insert syntax. If you need a DB to support transactions, you need to use the InnoDB engine. Most servers are not optimized for InnoDB tables so that usually results in worse performance... and I could go on.
So, given the choice, I'd always go with SQL Server. If you plan to deal with XML in your database, use extended data types, have extensive use of user defined functions and stored procs, plan to use user defined types or user defined aggregate funtions, use the database to persist objects from an OO app, SQL Server would be the preferred DB (this a brief list of new SQL Server 2005 features).
Even with the enterprise features of MySQL, you should remember that those are new features for MySQL, but they have existed for quite a while in SQL Server...
Biggest MySQL advantage: price. I haven't been able to test SQL Server 2005 performance, but I would expect it to improve over the current version...
All in all, IMO, SQL Server is a more robust, better performing app, specially for an enterprise. For Snitz use, MySQL can be a good low (no) price option. Personally I only go with MySQL when SQL Server is not available, or not available at a reasonable price.
<

Given that, how does the Express version (of SQL Server 2005) fit in?<

Frankly I don't know the Express version. It has the limitations we discussed previously, but I guess it should have all the other major features. Can't be sure about it though.<

If you're talking corporate, I wouldn't go past Oracle. Not really Snitz-friendly, but IMHO walks all over MS. But I'm a tad biased, I worked there for over 5yrs, but was more focussed on the multi-dimensional side rather than the relational side.<

Personally I don't like Oracle.<

Neither do I. I installed the developer edition (10g I think?) and it was a nightmare to admin. I guess thats why Oracle DBA's are paid so much.
And if you thought you needed a degree to figure out Microsoft's licencing you need a PhD to figure out Oracles - http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pricing/eplext.pdf<

Much harder to admin, much harder to optimize, much harder to program. Just MVHO.<

Originally posted by Podge
And if you thought you needed a degree to figure out Microsoft's licencing you need a PhD to figure out Oracles - http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pricing/eplext.pdf

Must ... find ... asprin ... <

All I want is MS SQL to do a simple cluster and I'd be happy. Fault tolerance and automatic fail over are two things that MS hasn't even gotten close to yet. Not that MySQL's implemention is much better than a single point system, but at least it has some support for it.<

What exactly do you mean. Not that I've done it, but clustering is supported by SQL Server with the proper OS and hardware config...<

Seems like those features are improved in SQL Server 2005. You can have a look at the SQL Server site, there is a lot of info on high availability capabilities of the new SQL Server version.<

MySQL 5 has worked well in beta, I've been using it for a few months, I've ported most of my internal db applications to mysql on linux from SQL Server on W2K and I have no plans to go back to sql server. Most of the missing db features are now available. Who knows, maybe someday SQL Server will introduce the new LIMIT SQL attribute :)
<

Originally posted by ruirib
What exactly do you mean. Not that I've done it, but clustering is supported by SQL Server with the proper OS and hardware config...

Fail over clustering, but that's it. It's a stretch to call that clustering in the first place. Hot spare would be more appropriate.<

New version has better and simpler support for those features.<

Originally posted by Doug G
Who knows, maybe someday SQL Server will introduce the new LIMIT SQL attribute :)

No need to now that SQL Server 2005 has the ROW_NUMBER() function.<

Probably the best feature in mySQL 5.0:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/server-sql-mode.html SQL MODE settings, especially the NO_BACKSLASH_ESCAPES option . <

Originally posted by Doug G
Who knows, maybe someday SQL Server will introduce the new LIMIT SQL attribute :)

No need to now that SQL Server 2005 has the ROW_NUMBER() function. Thanks for the info! I guess I should check out 2005 one of these days <