Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 03:22:50PM -0400, Ron Peterson wrote:
> 2007-08-28_10:53:41-0400 Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>:
>
> > The google hits argument is no reason not to change the name.
>
> It is.  When people start searching for information using the term
> "postgres" they will be missing out on the vast majority of available
> information for years.

Has anyone actually looked at what those 27M PostgreSQL hits are? I'm
betting that 90% of them are duplicate copies of mailing list traffic.
If you exclude content generated by us (which doesn't count because we
can change the name via sed), I'm betting there's just barely 5M web
pages about us (which would account for all the Postgres hits).
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby                        decibel@decibel.org
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)