Re: Problem with recent PostgreSQL relatedpressrelease

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Advocacy List <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Problem with recent PostgreSQL relatedpressrelease
Date: 2007-07-13 21:06:14
Message-ID: 4697E946.1020407@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Dave Page wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>>
>> PostgreSQL Core is the distribution developed and distributed by the
>> PostgreSQL.Org community. We are one of the many contributors to this
>> excellent database software. It is 100% enterprise ready and
>> commercially supported.
>
> Which means what exactly? Precisely nothing as far as whether CMD are
> THE PostgreSQL Company or A PostgreSQL Company.

Precisely nothing to you, which I accept. It a differentiating factor
for us.

>
> What remains true, is that both our companies offer fine products that
> are derived from Community PostgreSQL, but ARE NOT Community PostgreSQL
> (if you doubt that, md5sum is your friend). We also both offer support
> for our own products, and the community versions.
>

No what remains true is your company sells Advanced Server as is its
right and further claims that it is "better" than PostgreSQL.

CMD sells Replicator as is its right and further claims that is *is*
PostgreSQL just with added replication. We don't downplay PostgreSQL, we
embrace it. We don't market our product as better, we market it as
PostgreSQL with an additional feature for those who require it. Our
entire product line *is* PostgreSQL or a PostgreSQL utility (Slony).

That is the distinction.

For CMD there is nothing better than PostgreSQL and the few out there
that try to make something better are destined to fail as the community
continues to grow and build yet a better product.

The *only* reason replicator exists in its current form is that the
community has clearly stated that PostgreSQL will not ship with
integrated replication.

> If you're going to argue that adding a replication engine means you
> remain a "PostgreSQL Company", but us adding Oracle compatibility whilst
> retaining all PostgreSQL features and syntax means we no longer are,
> then with all due respect, you need to cut back on the coffee :-)

This point is not about technology. It is about ideals.

>
> PS. I spent all day resisting the temptation to jump into this thread,
> but I regret that the urge was too great :-(
>

Yeah good luck with that ;)

Joshua D. Drake

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-07-13 21:07:22 Re: Problem with recent PostgreSQL relatedpressrelease
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2007-07-13 21:05:15 Re: Problem with recent PostgreSQL relatedpressrelease