Home > Databases > mSQL 3.0 Released mSQL 3.0 Released Eugenia Loli 2002-08-02 Databases 4 Comments The new version of mSQL, 3.0, includes tunable memory use, higher performance, enhanced Indexing, single process and multi-process Servers and more. About The Author Eugenia Loli Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker. Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli 4 Comments 2002-08-02 8:37 pm My ISP has been stopping support on mSQL since everyone has been flocking to MySQL during the past two years. I didn’t knew it was still being developped. 2002-08-04 1:49 am i don’t see a point why anyone would use mSQL for production at all these days. it started it out as a toy (a program to complement the author’s phd thesis or something) and will still be. even the MySQL team wouldn’t use it back in the days where they do not have their own sql engine. if you want fast, lightweight database why go sql in the first place? use berkeleydb or some in-memory or native serialization stuff. if you want sql, just do directly to MySQL or Interbase/Firebird (personally I’ve never really liked PostgreSQL). MySQL also offers small overhead, can also be embedded, has lots of commonly needed features (except some of the crucial ones like VIEW or referential integrity heheh), and is available virtually anywhere you look for unix hosting. the most important thing is, where is mSQL user base nowadays? MySQL has this huge mass (thanks to the popularity of PHP) and you can easily get free assistance when you encounter problems. what if i have mSQL problems, do i have to buy commercial support? hm, i’d rather use MySQL anytime… 2002-08-05 6:59 am MySQL has referencial integrity (as well as transactions of course). Just use the InnoDB table handler and you can do FOREIGN KEYS to your heart content (and get errors if you don’t insert/update values that match this constraint). 2002-08-05 1:49 pm yes, i’ve been using transactions in mysql (usually with bdb). but a couple of friends i’ve talked to say they’re having problems with innodb’s foreign key so i’ve been restraining from using the feature. i’m not sure what the problems are, i’ll check with them first. the problem with innodb is very few shared hosts offer it. they do offer postgresql more often though.