Re: [Fwd: MS SQL compatible functions]

Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Philip Hallstrom wrote:
> > I dunno... you could also get the type of people that have built (or
> > inherited) a pre-existing application written in Oracle/SQLServer/etc that
> > no longer want to pay the license fees and would like to switch to
> > PostgreSQL, but aren't looking (or don't have the time right now) to
> > convert their entire application... having that abstraction layer makes it
> > that much easier for them to make the switch...
>
> Yes. No question about it. Our biggest problem is that it lacks
> _excitement_. :-)
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

Or it lacks priority.....on another thread a caller is asking for Distributed
PG
so he can install 20 linux boxes instead of an IBM 390 or Sun E10k

PG and Ingress have always been more popular in the academic world, why
not channel our energy in that area. Just imagine, a good distributed OS
(linux),
a good distributed DB (DPG) and a good distributed HTTP (apache, soap) and
we have lift off.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medi Montaseri medi(at)CyberShell(dot)com
Unix Distributed Systems Engineer HTTP://www.CyberShell.com
CyberShell Engineering
-------------------------------------------------------------------------