Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: FAQ on Embedding Postgres

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: FAQ on Embedding Postgres
Date: 2008-03-05 17:48:30
Message-ID: 20080305094830.1082378e@jd-laptop (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:41:26 -0800
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:

> Stopping there seems like a very bad idea from a public relations
> point of view.  Making the suggestion generic and naming several FLOSS
> DBs as an alternative might work better.

IMO, entries last forever, for years and years even after we fix them.
I believe we should make reference that PostgreSQL is not generally
considered an embeddable platform and call it good.


Joshua D. Drake

The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: 
PostgreSQL Community Conference:
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project:
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-03-05 17:56:01
Subject: Re: FAQ on Embedding Postgres
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2008-03-05 17:41:26
Subject: Re: FAQ on Embedding Postgres

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group