MySQL on Windows - Good Idea?

mikeballer asks: "We currently run our website from a shared hosting environment, with ASP and MS SQL Server. We will be moving to a dedicated host, and to save money, we are considering transitioning to MySQL while remaining in a Windows environment. I had read the Windows-vs-Unix section of the MYSQL documentation, but what is Slashdot's perspective on the performance of MySQL in a Windows environment?"

You should experience no problems

[WebHostingGuy]

While I believe MySQL works better and has more support for the *nix platform you should have no major problems with running MySQL on Windows. I have seen it done lots of times without problems.

I use it

[SocialEngineer]

I've used it for testing and whatnot, as well as running on dedicated servers (had to have it running in our techlab at college, which is Windows only). In both environments it performs fairly well, however, I must say that we weren't really putting much load on it.

Important Consequence of MySQL for Windows

[Randolpho]

I can't really quote performance stats; I've never dealt with a server that gets enough traffic to make a difference.

What I can tell you is that there is a major, important consequence to using MySQL for Windows rather than *nix. It stems from the way MySQL stores table data: the name of the table is the filename of the file used to store that table. Ditto for database names.

On Windows, filenames are case insensitive. The filename "MySQL" is the same as "mysql" is the same as "MysqL", etc. Consequently, table and database names on MySQL windows servers are case insensitive. Case is preserved on *nix, because filenames are case sensitive.

That's not to say that you shouldn't use MySQL for Windows, just be prepared for portability issues if you happen to migrate from *nix.

MySQL documentation on the subject [mysql.com]

Re:Can't resist

[phenix927]

I'm a big OSS fan as well, and administer Windows Servers. I also use every single platform I can get my hands on. I found from experience it can be more difficult to install most OSS Apps on windows than on what they were natively written for. A true geek can use whatever they are given. But back to the point at hand .. MySQL and Postgres runs perfectly fine on Windows. I've been running it in production for about 4 years.

ASP on Windows, MySQL on Linux

[Omega1045]

At a past company I worked at, we ran ASP pages on an NT machine which connected to MySQL databases on a Linux machine. We used dual NICs on the NT machine, one that was connected to the database machine on a privately addresses network and one faced into the DMZ. This seemed to work fairly well as we were able to use an older server with Linux. All we really needed was a minimal Linux install and plenty of RAM and disk. Back then we also used IPFW to firewall up the database machine. It only allowed SSH connections from a few IP addresses, and database port connections only from the web server. I thought it performed well, but this was a few years ago. I guess a modern solution would probably use something faster that the full-duplex 100 mb NIC we were using. You could probably hook up gigabit over copper with something as simple as a crossover cable from the NT machine to the Linux machine.

No matter the harware, keeping your database on a different machine than your public-facing web server is always a good idea.

Re:Can't resist

[Zontar The Mindless]

What's germane to the current discussion is that MySQL for Windows does exist, runs fine and fast, and MySQL AB provide both unofficial and official support for it same as for MySQL on most other platforms.

The MySQL win32 mailing list and forum are plenty active, and MySQL AB are generally quite happy to sell you paid support for your servers running their product regardless of the OS that happens to be on them. Even if it's Windows. ;)

MySQL works pretty much the same on Windows as it does anywhere else, the one major exception to this being MySQL Cluster, which is currently supported on Linux, Solaris, and OS X only.

I'd personally rather see people switch to an OSS operating system and run MySQL on that, but that's just my 2 öre. But if you really want to run it on Windows - go for it.

Too expensive?

[PornMaster]

Depending on the features you need, you could probably get away with MS SQL Server 2005 Workgroup Edition, which is ~$800.

Recoding takes time and introduces risk. It's up to you to evaluate those against the $800.

Here's the edition matrix, in case you're interested.
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/prodinfo/features/com pare-features.mspx [microsoft.com]