Re: Postgress and MYSQL

Quoting Rick Gigger <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com>:

> > On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> > > Not to mention that PostgreSQL.Org has some of the most complete
> > > documentation
> > > of any software out there.
> >
> > Yes, I don't understand why people seem to keep complaining about
> > Postgres' documentation - it is by far the best reference documentation
> > I've ever come across.
> >
> > Maybe it's that there isn't much tutorial content in the documentation -
> > for somebody trying to learn how to do SQL in the first place, it's not
> > going to hold your hand and I could see how that will turn off newbies.
>
> I used to have that complaint until I got more aquainted with the docs.
> When I used to use mysql I found that if I used search feature on their docs
> I could find exactly what I was looking for almost immediately. When I use
> the postgres doc search feature I don't get the same experience. It is
> slow, sometimes doesn't work and rarely gives me what I am looking for.
> Then I just started using google to search the docs and realized that just
> looking at the TOC is usually good enough and that the postgres docs are
> actually excellent. My bad experience with search, as well as the good
> experience with mysql search (do other people feel this way) however led me
> initially to conclude that the postgres docs were not as good.
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
>

That is something we can't seem to get across the new folks who think that they
can come from MySQL and move to PostgreSQL. I don't know why- I've heard people
say it because they are both open source, I heard (new) people say that they
should have to read the docs first, the reasons go on and on. What I do know is:

1) Comparing MySQL to PostgreSQL is not a valid technical discussion They're
different products.

2) Assuming the way MySQL does is correct is also invalid. What MySQL does for
MySQL works for them. Over time and with and open mind, I saw that even back
in the 6.x days that PostgreSQL was going to be a more robust product
and as such I had to not only learn PG but I also had to learn more about
relational theory and SQL. I was initially put off too (I remember all my
engineering buddies and I cracking jokes about those "database people") but
at the time, my DB experience was Dbase, Filemaker Pro and Foxpro. I mean
really... *laff*

3) Not being able to "find" something in via search BEFORE even reading the
documentation is somewhat backwards. You have to at least get a feel for
the docs before even know what to look for. That is not to say that the
search engine is not problematic but it is to say that I'm am more and more
convinced that knowing how to search more important than what is being
searched for.

4) As many people pointed out before, a product should not be technical
education it should product education. Some people take it as being rude
we some on-list says use google or check <some other site>. Granted
being told "this is not hand holding" is definitely a slap in the face its
been done to me and I'm sure there is a better way to put it but the
reality is that PG docs are very good. Get some paper and print
they out double-sided- they're an excellent reference. However, you have to
understand the basics first and that simply does not belong on the PG
site (save a link to some community recommendations).

BTW, I've asked this before but where are the 7.4 docs in PS or PDF format? If
any one needs or wants them, I do have the 7.3.2-US books (admin, user,
programmer & reference) in PS with the duplexing code. They all fit nicely in a
3" ring binder and will compliment any bookshelf :)

--
Keith C. Perry, MS E.E.
Director of Networks & Applications
VCSN, Inc.
http://vcsn.com

____________________________________
This email account is being host by:
VCSN, Inc : http://vcsn.com