Re: FAQ on Embedding Postgres

On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 10:53:07AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:30:43 -0800
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > I believe there is wording that could be used that would not
> > convey that sentiment.
>
> Such as:
>
> PostgreSQL is designed as a client / server architecture

Good so far.

> and does not normally embed in an optimal way.

While could be twisted around to be factually true--it's possible to
ship a VM as part of a software package, for example--it's at best
misleading. Let's just cut the weasel words out.

> Discussion of other product solutions to the embedded problem is
> outside the scope of this document.

As Alvaro said, it should be possible to put this in a positive light.

I still think it is good to name a few places to start the research on
embedded SQL DBMSs rather than leave people with the feeling of, "It's
all up to you from here. Go away."

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate