Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: more anti-postgresql FUD
Date: 2006-10-10 18:50:44
Message-ID: 5175.1160506244@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> * MySQL is used as a primary development platform.

> Another good reason.

Actually that's *the* reason --- it's always going to be hard for
Postgres to look good for an application that's been designed/optimized
for MySQL. The application has already made whatever compromises it
had to for that platform, and dropping it onto a different DB won't
magically undo them.

Some days I think database independence is a myth.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2006-10-10 18:54:58 Re: more anti-postgresql FUD
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-10-10 18:35:30 Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2006-10-10 18:54:58 Re: more anti-postgresql FUD
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2006-10-10 18:35:30 Re: more anti-postgresql FUD