Guys - does anyone knows whether MS SQL or Sybase is supported by Mediawiki?
-zham
I believe not.
On 9/3/07, zham rock zhamrock@gmail.com wrote:
Guys - does anyone knows whether MS SQL or Sybase is supported by Mediawiki?
-zham _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
On 03/09/07, zham rock zhamrock@gmail.com wrote:
Guys - does anyone knows whether MS SQL or Sybase is supported by Mediawiki?
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Installation gives the requirements, which include:
# Database Server
* MySQL 4.0 or later * or PostgreSQL 8.1 or later (also requires plpgsql and tsearch2) * or Ingres 2006 or later (SVN-Download)
So MS SQL and Sybase are not supported.
On 03/09/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/09/07, zham rock zhamrock@gmail.com wrote:
Guys - does anyone knows whether MS SQL or Sybase is supported by Mediawiki?
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Installation gives the requirements, which include:
# Database Server
* MySQL 4.0 or later * or PostgreSQL 8.1 or later (also requires plpgsql and tsearch2) * or Ingres 2006 or later (SVN-Download)So MS SQL and Sybase are not supported.
Ingres shouldn't be in the list either; we don't support it in the core software. Have removed the misleading information from the page.
We have no roadmap for supporting additional DBMS; a longer discussion of additional DBMS support appears at http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Project:Support_desk&oldid=12...:
"Note that there was some recent work in this area (see http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9767), but I'm not quite sure what the status of that is at the moment. There's no official roadmap for inclusion of support for other DBMS; support for, e.g. PostgreSQL has become available thanks to a dedicated maintainer with a strong interest in making this happen. From our point of view, there's no benefit in supporting DBMS which we don't use in production.
The Oracle support was, at one point, removed from the software, and was re-added, but has once again slipped into an unmaintained state. robchurch | talk 01:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)"
Rob Church
Just wondering why anyone would want to do this. My understanding is that MySQL and PostGRES are both free and open source, and are installable on lots of platforms, and it sounds a lot harder to add support for more databases than it is to just install one of the standard ones.
Are there known performance issues that would make either of these superior in theory? I get the sense that there might be reasons to prefer Oracle, if you already are paying the license. Or is it just inertia? Dealing with an uncooperative hosting service?
I'm not a db expert so forgive me if this question shows a lack of insight about relative merits of the different RDBMS options.
On Sep 3, 2007, at 9:13 AM, zham rock wrote:
Guys - does anyone knows whether MS SQL or Sybase is supported by Mediawiki?
-zham _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
===================================== Jim Hu Associate Professor Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics 2128 TAMU Texas A&M Univ. College Station, TX 77843-2128 979-862-4054
On 03/09/07, Jim Hu jimhu@tamu.edu wrote:
Are there known performance issues that would make either of these superior in theory? I get the sense that there might be reasons to prefer Oracle, if you already are paying the license. Or is it just inertia? Dealing with an uncooperative hosting service?
On the performance angle, MySQL should perform better, simply because MediaWiki has been developed against it, and is therefore optimised for it.
Businesses probably don't want to support additional software if they're paying Oracle's, er, prices, for licencing, consultants, training, etc. for example.
Rob Church
Yes, probably in many cases it's due to what the administrators are happy using as well. I use postgresql because I do a lot with postgres and that's where my skills are. I've attended MS SQL courses and imagine if that's what you use daily, that's what you'd be happiest with - you know all the backup, replication, performance tweaking etc.
Oliver Kohll
On 3 Sep 2007, at 18:43, Rob Church wrote:
On the performance angle, MySQL should perform better, simply because MediaWiki has been developed against it, and is therefore optimised for it.
Businesses probably don't want to support additional software if they're paying Oracle's, er, prices, for licencing, consultants, training, etc. for example.
oliver@gtwm.co.uk / 0845 456 1810 / 07814 828608 The Old Bank, 4 Ravenhill Rd, Swansea SA5 5AW, UK
NOTE No contracts may be concluded on behalf of GT webMarque by means of e- mail communications. The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the intended recipient at the e-mail address to which it has been addressed; it may not be disclosed to or used by anyone other than this addressee, nor may it be copied in any way. If received in error please return to sender via e-mail.
DISCLAIMER Please note that neither GT webMarque Ltd nor the sender accept any responsibility for viruses transmitted via e-mail. It is your responsibility to scan attachments (if any).
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org