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


From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>,"Guido Barosio" <gbarosio(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re:
Date: 2006-02-28 20:40:25
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Guido Barosio wrote:
> > Were do we finde accurate values, more updated ones?
> > Guess we should measure current values and compare them later, in a 
> > few months after oracle  dbms war gets quiet.
> > 
> >
> "In our survey, 90 percent of our developers work with or 
> deployed to Windows platforms," McKendrick explained. 
> "Windows dominates this space, and a database that doesn't 
> run on Windows or doesn't run effectively in Windows would 
> have a fairly limited reach."
> Does that strike anyone else as being *highly* skewed?

Not really. Rather realistic, I'd say. It's a changing landscape, but
90% doesn't seem off at all to me.

With the possible exception that you don't really need to run
*efficiently*. Depending on what you mean, of course. Running as
efficient as MS Access does it certainly bad. Running as efficiently as
PostgreSQL does is definitly Ok in this case. PostgreSQL on cygwin (pre
8.0) is not OK.


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Mike EllsworthDate: 2006-02-28 22:05:20
Subject: What if?
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2006-02-28 20:21:41
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Franch-speaking community

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