On Monday 22 February 2010 16:10:40 David Fetter wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:45:40PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 February 2010 17:02:39 Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > * Josh Berkus:
> > > >> Isn't hstore key/value pair data, rather than schema-less.
> > > >
> > > > Well, when the "NoSQL" people talk about "schemaless", that's
> > > > what they mean.
> > >
> > > Some of them have got arbitrarily nested documents involving
> > > sequences, booleans, sequences of string/document pairs, strings,
> > > and floats. Positioning PostgreSQL's simple key/value support
> > > against that could be a PR mistake. 8-)
> > A better way to look at it is "improved support for storing
> > semi-structured and un-structured data". Because we have pretty
> > good support for that really, but these changes should make that
> > somewhat better.
> There's a technical term we use for "un-structured data:" random bits.
> That other people use this misnomer isn't a reason we should
> perpetuate it.
ISTM the point of this list/discussion is to focus on marketing of Postgres.
Given that, I don't think "improved support for storing random bits" is the
direction we should be going in.
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Robert Treat||Date: 2010-02-24 03:44:43|
|Subject: Anyone going to CodeStock 2010?|
|Previous:||From: David Fetter||Date: 2010-02-22 21:10:40|
|Subject: Re: Major features of 9.0?|