Re: PostgreSQL in the press again

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL in the press again
Date: 2004-11-09 21:35:45
Message-ID: 20041109213545.GH17541@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 09:28:12PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Externally, everybody thinks that there should be just one, just like
> there is for other databases.

I guess it's this thing that I want to understand. Why do people
believe that? Because other databases, where "other" are "the ones
I'd actually run important systems on" _don't_ have just one.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
I remember when computers were frustrating because they *did* exactly what
you told them to. That actually seems sort of quaint now.
--J.D. Baldwin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2004-11-09 22:35:29 Re: Final Copy Edit: Press Release, Page
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2004-11-09 21:28:12 Re: PostgreSQL in the press again