Re: PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot
От | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1048174893.9992.312.camel@camel обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot ("Shridhar Daithankar" <shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Wed, 2003-03-19 at 22:42, Shridhar Daithankar wrote: > On 19 Mar 2003 at 9:20, Josh Berkus wrote: > > Our "competitors" are MS SQL, SQLAnywhere, Oracle, and DB2. Business-class > > databases. The tech press likes to focus on MySQL vs. PostgreSQL because > > they haven't caught up to the idea that an OSS database could compete with > > commmercial offerings. When *you* focus on MySQL vs. PostgreSQL, YOU ARE > > BUYING IN TO THEIR IGNORANCE, and helping the press compartmentalize Postgres > > as an alternative to MySQL. > > Agreed. Druming our features is the way to go. Not slamming other *OR* > defending ourselves. > The truth is that the reason we have many of these postgresql vs. mysql is because advocates of mysql often use old information and bad database theory in their arguments. For example, if you look at other open source databases like firebird or sapdb, you never hear arguments that transactions, triggers, foreign keys, views, subselects etc... are unnecessary. IMHO "competing" with mysql is pointless, because I think we already "beat" them on our own merits; but we do need to defend ourselves when people make false claims about postgresql, and we need should advocate sound database fundamentals as well, whether they come from mysql, oracle, m$ or whoever. Robert Treat
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: