Re: 10g v. PostgreSQL 8.0 v. MySQL 5

On Monday 12 December 2005 16:51, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us:
> > http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560

I find the article poorly assembled and researched. It's biased towards Oracle because of some image in his head that he fails to adequately demonstrate. He muses too much about his personal feelings and very little about facts.

1. About His hunt for documentation: It's based on using 'one' search phrase. If he used other phrases then he should list them at the end of the article. He didn't audit the documentation in the distribution nor the documentation on postgresql.org

2. About Installation: He didn't explain what his problem was when he attempted to install postgres on windows.

3. Verification of a successful Installation: There isn't enough proof describing his methodology. Sure I agree with keeping comments short, which is why he should have included a link to an exhaustive list of what he did do to validate the install.

3. Creating the User Account: Who's the audience, people in the know or newbies? He mixes statements that assume you should be familiar with databases with superferlous newbie comments implying it's a waste of postgres' need to take the extra step of adding security.

4. Resource requirements: It's nice to be complimented however I want to know why i.e. details. How about using standard utilities that show the resources used? He failed to find hardware specs; what did he do, how did he look for it?

There is no table at the end of the article that brings all the details, what little there is, together.

Obviously, this person was more interested in getting his name up in lights than doing the job right. The article is useful from the point of a human resources issue, I would never hire somebody who promises so much and performs so little.

I've wasted enough time as it is making this reply.