On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why
> not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that Volkswagen
> is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time)
> referred to as VW.
> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.
An issue with PG (or Pg) is that it is used for other things with about 170m
One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25
company at pg.com and the PG stock symbol. Coincidentally, they are one of
the big practitioners of brand management.
Would this be similar to naming a software project GM, a la General Motors?
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Joshua.Kramer||Date: 2007-09-27 17:21:17|
|Subject: Re: Using Postgres as an alias|
|Previous:||From: Marc G. Fournier||Date: 2007-09-27 17:14:07|
|Subject: Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.|