Oracle vs MySql vs MSSql
Author
for a medium size MMO game, say 150,000 membership and at peak 3000 active player concurrently in the game. which of the DBMS:Oracle, MySQL and MSSQL should be the best choice for this system? please give me some comment on both performance and cost efficient.
What server are you going to be running this on? Linux? NT? If it was my choice I''d have to say run MySQL on a Linux server (possible Redhat, because it comes with the distro). The best part, is they are free... and we all like free don''t we. I''m not to sure how they stand up to each other in performance, I''d have to assume Oracle is the fastest (but it will probably cost you in the $$ department).
Based on price alone, use Linux and MySQL. Based on stability and support, I''d say Linux (or other UNIX) with Oracle (if you can afford it).
I''d say that in this case, MS is a good middle road, being less expensive than Oracle and a high end UNIX box. In the past, performance leaned heavily in favor of Oracle, although I got out of the DB business a couple of years ago. I doubt that the DB performance would hurt you too bad anyways (you''ll need to be caching a lot of data anyways).
The people at MySQL a couple of years ago posted some benchmarks saying they were almost as fast as Oracle in some types of operations. I haven''t seen anything similar in a while, so I don''t know for sure how well MySQL stands up performance-wise.
It really depends on what kind of servers you are already working on. If you''re using Linux, stick with something that is easily run on linux (MySQL). If you''re using Windows go for a copy of MSSQL Server. I would assume with 150k subs that you are probably funded well enough to afford any of the above options.
I''d say that in this case, MS is a good middle road, being less expensive than Oracle and a high end UNIX box. In the past, performance leaned heavily in favor of Oracle, although I got out of the DB business a couple of years ago. I doubt that the DB performance would hurt you too bad anyways (you''ll need to be caching a lot of data anyways).
The people at MySQL a couple of years ago posted some benchmarks saying they were almost as fast as Oracle in some types of operations. I haven''t seen anything similar in a while, so I don''t know for sure how well MySQL stands up performance-wise.
It really depends on what kind of servers you are already working on. If you''re using Linux, stick with something that is easily run on linux (MySQL). If you''re using Windows go for a copy of MSSQL Server. I would assume with 150k subs that you are probably funded well enough to afford any of the above options.
IBM has a new version of DB2 called DB2 EEE that is supposed to be reasonable priced. It also works on Linux and they claim it scales well across commodity hardware machines.
I use MSSQL, Oracle, DB2, and Omnidex at work and they all have their pros and cons.
I suggest you try them all out on an eval basis and make your determination from there. The bottom line is there is not a single DB that covers every solution.
LostLogic
www.lostlogic.com
Author, Multiplayer Game Programming
Author, Strategy Game Programming with Direct X 9 (Not yet released)
I use MSSQL, Oracle, DB2, and Omnidex at work and they all have their pros and cons.
I suggest you try them all out on an eval basis and make your determination from there. The bottom line is there is not a single DB that covers every solution.
LostLogic
www.lostlogic.com
Author, Multiplayer Game Programming
Author, Strategy Game Programming with Direct X 9 (Not yet released)
Author
thx i got lots of useful information.
it sounds that Linux+MySQL is good for a starting up company right?
is there any websites that do benchmarking on DBMS? you know the company that made the DBMS always claims they r the best!
it sounds that Linux+MySQL is good for a starting up company right?
is there any websites that do benchmarking on DBMS? you know the company that made the DBMS always claims they r the best!
We use MSDE - although it has a 2 gig limit for the free license - we just spread across multiple single databases if we go over 2gigs.
Personally, use MySQL - because then you can run ok with Linux and \or m$.
It depends if you want a transactional database or not. I probably wouldn''t use InnoDB in a high-volume server just yet (though I hear Slashdot uses it to great effect...) and if transactions is what you need, go for Oracle. You can download the full version of Oracle 9i Enterprise Edition for free from the Oracle site, so you can develop on the free version, and only have to pay anything when your site goes live (I''d assume by that time you''d be pretty well funded, even if you''re not at the moment). Mind you, it''s a 1.5GB download, so be prepared 
If you don''t need transaction, and I can''t really say whether that''d be the case or not - it depends on how you write the game. Then MySQL might be a viable option. However, in my opinion, MySQL doesn''t have a few of the features that I''d like if I were writing a high-volume game server. Features like stored procedures, bound parameters, etc.
If you don''t need transaction, and I can''t really say whether that''d be the case or not - it depends on how you write the game. Then MySQL might be a viable option. However, in my opinion, MySQL doesn''t have a few of the features that I''d like if I were writing a high-volume game server. Features like stored procedures, bound parameters, etc.
If I had my way, I''d have all of you shot!
codeka.com - Just click it.
Maybe you should try out MimerSQL? I''ve been using it a lot at work recently and IMHO it''s a fast and unusually full-featured DBMS for that price. Haven''t found any benchmarks though. Runs on Win32, Linux, PocketPC and a few more.
It has been a while since I have been checking out the DB situation but MySQL used to lack many nice features, such as nested queries and transactions, even though it was also known to be fast. There is another open source database called PostgreSQL that has many of the features that MySQL lack, but is also said to be a bit slower. I really do not know if any of those statements are true anymore.
Mythic seems to feel that MySQL works well for their game Dark Age of Camelot, which pretty much fits the game description in the original post.
Mythic seems to feel that MySQL works well for their game Dark Age of Camelot, which pretty much fits the game description in the original post.
We''re using MySQL for our project. Sure, there are a few features that won''t be implemented by the time we go live (transactions in particular), but honestly we should never want to use those features. I can''t imagine anything that would upset the users more than running around playing and getting stuff and then all of a sudden the servers go down and you lose everything because "We had to roll back the game to a previous state".
Anyway, by the time you''d need the other features (nested subqueries and such), they should all be implemented, since 4.1 will have almost everything.
Anyway, by the time you''d need the other features (nested subqueries and such), they should all be implemented, since 4.1 will have almost everything.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
