| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Duncan Garland <duncan(dot)garland(at)ntlworld(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0 |
| Date: | 2006-10-21 19:37:18 |
| Message-ID: | 200610211237.18483.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Josh,
> I would further argue that many of the features being pushed for 8.3,
> recursive queries, bitmap indexes, rollup/group by, updateable queries
> are the direct result of positioning either against Oracle/MSSQL or
> MySQL pending feature sets. (Although more toward Oracle/MSSQL certainly).
Huh? While "keeping up with the Ellisons" is a motivating factor, it's not
anywhere near the primary one. The reason we want all that stuff is becuase
they're useful features. When's the last time you saw us push something that
wasn't useful just because someone else had it?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shane Ambler | 2006-10-21 20:26:02 | Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0 |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-10-21 16:55:09 | Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0 |