Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.

From: "John Wang" <johncwang(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "PostgreSQL Advocacy List" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.
Date: 2007-09-27 17:19:02
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
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
Google hits.

One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25
company at 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?

John Wang

In response to


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Joshua.KramerDate: 2007-09-27 17:21:17
Subject: Re: Using Postgres as an alias
Previous:From: Marc G. FournierDate: 2007-09-27 17:14:07
Subject: Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group