Re: [GENERAL] Is my MySQL Gaining ?

Hi all;

I am working on an outline for topics that I think should have detailed
discussion and/or tutorial items. Unfortunately my laptop is in the shop
(bad motherboard) but when it comes back, I will post it.

I think that Shrindhar is right-- these things do not belong in the main
documentation which should be complete, technical, and accessible. But
instead, I think that we need a separate document which teaches someone how
to use an enterprise RDBMS, and particularly PostgreSQL. Learning these
topics piecemeal is not very helpful, IMO :-(

I hope that the progression will be:
Outline -> disjointed tutorials -> integrated mega-tutorial -> larger
curriculum set.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com>
To: "Tony" <tony(at)unihost(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>; <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [GENERAL] Is my MySQL Gaining ?

> On Monday 29 December 2003 15:25, Tony wrote:
> > By that logic then, we can probably ditch the PG Tutorial altogether and
> > provide a quick ref card of PG commands and keywords, with a few pages
> > on how PG is different should be plenty.
> >
> > The bisggest problem that I faced when moving to PG was the complete
> > lack of any cetralised information source for this information. Sure
> > there are tutorials on the web, first track them down, then convert
> > their use to PG then collate them, then make some sense of it all.
> > This is the kind of aloofness that I have mentioned previously, just
> > because it doesn't belong, doesn't mean it's not needed, and it only
> > needs to be written once. Although I know some of the concepts and I'm
> > beginning to grock them, I'm still trying to collate enough to satisfy
> > my needs.
> >
> > Assuming yo *do* want to grow the PG community and attract people from
> > other systems, the easier the transition for them, the less likely they
> > are to look elsewhere for something that appears easier. Easier
> > doesn't always mean easier to use, sometimes it can mean easier to get
> > to grips with.
>
> *Sigh*.. You just read my first remark which you could have bypassed but
> anyways..
>
> What do you think of offer I made? I was slightly disappointed to see that
you
> missed it..
>
> I am not removing my original message. Please read and let me know what do
you
> think..
>
> >
> > Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
> > >For one thing, these thing do not belong to postgresql documentation.
> > >
> > >But I don't believe there is shortage of material on these topics on
web
> > > and in print.
> > >
> > >However if you are refering to explaining these things, w.r.t.
postgresql,
> > > I would be more than happy to churn out some extremely basic
tutorials.
> > >
> > >Can you tell us what all you need? Rephrasing, if you know these(and
some
> > >other) concpets by now, what all you missed while learning postgresql?
> > >
> > >It may sound like stupid question but unlearning things out of
imagination
> > > is not easy...:-)
>
> Shridhar
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>
>