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

Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Ron Peterson <ron(dot)peterson(at)yellowbank(dot)com>
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Date: 2007-08-29 19:31:22
Message-ID: 46D5C98A.8080805@cheapcomplexdevices.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
Ron Peterson wrote:
> 2007-08-28_10:53:41-0400 Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>:
>> The google hits argument is no reason not to change the name.
> It is.  When people start searching for information using the term
> "postgres" they will be missing out on the vast majority of available
> information for years.

Some silver lining on this one, though - they'll mostly miss out
on older info like the "PostgresQL 6.2.1 on Red Hat 5.0 is slow"
comparison pages.

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Ron MayerDate: 2007-08-29 19:37:01
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Previous:From: Ron MayerDate: 2007-08-29 19:25:14
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group