> -----Original Message-----
> From: Merlin Moncure [mailto:merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:34 PM
> To: Jason Hihn
> Cc: PostgreSQL Advocacy
> Subject: RE: [pgsql-advocacy] PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot
> MySQL works just fine for your typical web app and is optimized for that
> purpose. For example, they added a query caching feature which IMHO is
> useless except in a web environment. Their catering to the web crowd
> has helped establish them in the public eye.
> Postgres is the database of choice for business apps. This is a tough
> market to crack because of the conservatism of business planners and
> their well funded ability to buy top dollar software. Databases are
> like boxing: if two players go the distance, the judges give it to the
> I think in the long run, the 'business first' strategy will prevail.
> Database developers who can solve business problems usually make a lot
> more money than web developers. Since the dot.com fallout, this
> disparity has increased. This means a despite a smaller user base, the
> postgres community will be better funded and enjoy more of the top
> talent. Also, postgres has enjoyed and will continue to enjoy better
> support from the academic community because of its closer adherence to
> the relational model, maybe the closest of any major dbms.
You make an astute observation that I think should become a strategy of the
advocacy team. That is to portray MySQL as a "hobby" database, but Postgres
as a "production" database. I think this is a very easy stance to take,
since I've always thought that. Anyone caught arguing that MySQL is better
will show how much they don't know about Postgres or real databases.
Also with this stance, the two DB's will be able to cooperate and help
publicize OSS successes without having to cut each other down. Then though,
we must concede that MySQL is "good enough" for at least "armature" (hobby)
usage; and that is another statement that I agree with.
> As for the companion apps, Postgres is much less reliant on external
> tools than other dbs because of the extremely powerful client
> interfaces. I would like to see better dts services and better xml
> support (xml/edi) for adoption by businesses. A win32 port is
> absolutely crucial to start zapping sql server, which has virtually no
> direct competition for 2nd tier database deployments, and also to the
> embedded market which now relies on mysql, access, or FoxPro.
Both win32 and replication are big "requirements". I can delay the win32
requirement for a while, and I can suffer through huge pg_dumps for the time
being. If that wasn't the case, I'd be else where!
> Also, integration with Delphi/Kylix could use some press. This is a
> fantastic rad environment for win32/linux.
I've heard of it, but never used it. I took a look long enough to know that
I'd need to take a longer look later ;-)
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2003-03-19 16:18:38|
|Subject: Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff |
|Previous:||From: Stephan Szabo||Date: 2003-03-19 15:25:02|
|Subject: Re: Another naive question, inheritance and foreign key|
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2003-03-19 17:20:20|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot|
|Previous:||From: Christopher Kings-Lynne||Date: 2003-03-19 02:10:54|
|Subject: MySQL 4.0 production release (SlashDot)|