"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" wrote:
>
> Thus spake Lamar Owen
> > [Ok, I've been in touch with the author of the 'First Major Open Source
> > Database' article. Here's what he wants to do. Let me know what you
> > think, and correct any misinformation I may have fed him.]
> > [...]
> > - University Ingres, developed starting in 1977, qualifies for the
> > 'First Major Open Source Database' honor. Ingres is the direct
> > ancestor of PostgreSQL.
>
> Not that it is so important but I think that Postgres was a different
> project by the same person (Dr. Micheal Stonebraker) so it is probably
> more accurate to call them siblings.
Hmmmm... You may be right -- I wasn't there (in 1987 I was still a
sophomore in college, and was still hacking my old Z80-based computer).
I was quoting Bruce's History of PostgreSQL document, which states:
"PostgreSQL began as Ingres, developed at the University of California
at
Berkeley(1977-1985). The Ingres code was taken and enhanced by
Relational Technologies/Ingres Corporation, which produced one of the
first commercially successful relational database servers. (Ingres
Corp. was later purchased by Computer Associates.) Also at Berkeley,
Michael Stonebraker lead a team to develop an object-relational database
server
called Postgres(1986-1994). "
Hmmm... On second read, that seems ambiguous. Does anyone know if the
first Postgres codebase included any Ingres code (the criterion for
'ancestry')? Or was Postgres (a play on words anyway -- Ingres used the
QUEL language, others started using SEQUEL (later SQL), Postgres, being
different, used POSTQUEL) a complete rewrite from the ground up?
Not that it is terribly important, but I am interested in accuracy.
The Official Documentation doesn't even mention Ingres in its Short
History chapter.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11