Обсуждение: New PostgreSQL Website : advocacy.postgresql.org
Hi all, Over the last few weeks we've put together a new "Advocacy and Marketing" website for PostgreSQL: http://advocacy.postgresql.org It's now ready for public release. It has the first few case studies, lists the major advantages to PostgreSQL, and provides a place you can point your CIO, CTO, and CEO's at, etc. :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
Gerhard Häring wrote: > > * Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> [2002-10-02 10:34 +1000]: > > Over the last few weeks we've put together a new "Advocacy and > > Marketing" website for PostgreSQL: > > > > http://advocacy.postgresql.org > > Cool :-) :-) > A few remarks: Thanks Gerhard. :) > * [http://advocacy.postgresql.org/advantages/] > """ > ... > A point list for some technical features that PostgreSQL offers: > ... > * Replication (available commercially) allowing the duplication of > the database on multiple machines > """ > > IIRC there is now a replication solution in contrib/ I've never used > it though. So you can perhaps cut the "available commercially" There > might be other commercial offerings I know nothing about. Good point. Althought the /contrib/rserv version doesn't work for PostgreSQL 7.2.x (have tried), there is still Usogres and stuff. Will update that. :) > * "PostgreSQL : The worlds most advanced Open Source database" > This probably isn't entirely true any more, considering the > availability of SAP DB. I personally still stick with PostgreSQL, > however, as I like it and it seems to have much momentum. Hmmm... suggested new tag line? :) > * Allows you to win Bullshit-Bingo in 10 seconds. But that's by design > ;-) Heh Heh Heh > * I don't like serif-fonts like "Times New Roman" on web pages. What > about using a font declaration like (from my homepage): There aren't any typeface changing elements in the page (unless something got past me). And we don't use CSS anywhere. Seems to be really cross-browser this way. :) > body { font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; > background-color: #FFFFEE} > > throughout the site? Um... not yet. Haven't learnt CSS yet, don't have the spare time too, and for the moment "this works". Hope that doesn't sound like a bad attitude, it's just there's so much stuff going on at the moment. :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift > -- Gerhard -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> writes:
> Gerhard Häring wrote:
> > IIRC there is now a replication solution in contrib/ I've never
> > used it though. So you can perhaps cut the "available
> > commercially" There might be other commercial offerings I know
> > nothing about.
>
> Good point. Althought the /contrib/rserv version doesn't work for
> PostgreSQL 7.2.x (have tried), there is still Usogres and
> stuff. Will update that. :)
I think we should only advertise the features that we actually
support. IMHO, there is no open-source code that supports replication
in a way that is suitable for widespread production use -- so, at
least, you should keep the "commercially available" caveat.
Also, the feature list doesn't include foreign keys / ref int.,
cursors, ANSI outer joins, and MVCC (which you should probably explain
in terms a PHB can understand).
The list of interfaces should probably also include ecpg. If we're
including interfaces for languages not bundled with the database, Ruby
and PHP are probably worth including.
You can also elaborate on the support for stored procedures --
e.g. the languages in which they can be defined.
You might want to be a little more verbose on the support for
subqueries (don't just say UNION, etc.)
The paragraph titled "Extensible" seems to end in mid-sentence.
Mentioning the limitations of PostgreSQL might be good -- "we support
tables up to x gigabytes, with y rows, z columns, etc.". There's an
FAQ entry on this which you can probably adapt.
A brief bit on the history of Postgres might be good (it's been around
for a while, therefore it's not likely to die off any time soon).
The SapDB feature list is here:
http://www.sapdb.org/sap_db_features.htm
Might be worth looking at...
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
Hi Neil, Neil Conway wrote: > > Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> writes: > > Gerhard Häring wrote: > > > IIRC there is now a replication solution in contrib/ I've never > > > used it though. So you can perhaps cut the "available > > > commercially" There might be other commercial offerings I know > > > nothing about. > > > > Good point. Althought the /contrib/rserv version doesn't work for > > PostgreSQL 7.2.x (have tried), there is still Usogres and > > stuff. Will update that. :) > > I think we should only advertise the features that we actually > support. IMHO, there is no open-source code that supports replication > in a way that is suitable for widespread production use -- so, at > least, you should keep the "commercially available" caveat. Does anyone know how usable Usogres is? Haven't had the time to properly implement it and test it. :-/ > Also, the feature list doesn't include foreign keys / ref int., > cursors, ANSI outer joins, and MVCC (which you should probably explain > in terms a PHB can understand). Just added them (MVCC was already there though). > The list of interfaces should probably also include ecpg. If we're > including interfaces for languages not bundled with the database, Ruby > and PHP are probably worth including. Added these too. :) > You can also elaborate on the support for stored procedures -- > e.g. the languages in which they can be defined. Not yet. There's only so much that should be on the page, and although we have tonnes of features I'm not sure that it's not overdone already. > You might want to be a little more verbose on the support for > subqueries (don't just say UNION, etc.) > > The paragraph titled "Extensible" seems to end in mid-sentence. Oops. Thanks for pointing that out. Just fixed it. :) > Mentioning the limitations of PostgreSQL might be good -- "we support > tables up to x gigabytes, with y rows, z columns, etc.". There's an > FAQ entry on this which you can probably adapt. Good point, but not just yet. Let's see how this goes first. :) > A brief bit on the history of Postgres might be good (it's been around > for a while, therefore it's not likely to die off any time soon). Any suggestions to add to the presently-small-piece on the About page? If anyone can put together something that sounds good, then that would be an excellent improvement. > The SapDB feature list is here: > > http://www.sapdb.org/sap_db_features.htm > > Might be worth looking at... Thanks heaps Neil. Just added the stuff they mention, that we also have. Subtransactions was the only thing they seem to have that we don't (from that list). "Most Advanced Open Source Database" might still be correct after all. MVCC is only optional for them, and we have a bunch more available interfaces... :) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift > Cheers, > > Neil > > -- > Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:37:16PM -0400, Neil Conway wrote: > Mentioning the limitations of PostgreSQL might be good -- "we support > tables up to x gigabytes, with y rows, z columns, etc.". There's an > FAQ entry on this which you can probably adapt. You're looking at it wrong. PostgreSQL doesn't have limitations, it has capabilites. For example: PostgreSQL supports multi-terabytes databases with billions of rows and thousands of columns. Examples in <big company a>, <big company b>. -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those that can do binary > arithmetic and those that can't.
Greetings, Justin!
At 02.10.2002, 6:07, you wrote:
>> IIRC there is now a replication solution in contrib/ I've never used
>> it though. So you can perhaps cut the "available commercially" There
>> might be other commercial offerings I know nothing about.
JC> Good point. Althought the /contrib/rserv version doesn't work for
JC> PostgreSQL 7.2.x (have tried), there is still Usogres and stuff. Will
JC> update that. :)
In fact, contrib/rserv works quite well, I've been using it for half a year
already. There are gotchas, of course:
1) It does not work out of the box. Its build process was broken
some time ago. I tried to submit a patch for this, but had hard
time pushing it through the same developer who broke it. Well,
maybe I will at last be able to produce something that will please
him and it will be in 7.3.x
2) There is no coherent documentation for the package. Well, maybe
I should write some based on my experience. :]
3) If you dump/restore a DB with contrib/rserv, you'll need to do
some manual tweaking to its tables.
--
Ñ óâàæåíèåì, Àëåêñåé Áîðçîâ
îòäåë èíòåðíåò-ïðîåêòîâ ÎÎÎ "ÐÄÂ-Ìåäèà"
http://www.rdw.ru
http://www.vashdosug.ru
* Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> [2002-10-02 10:34 +1000]: > Over the last few weeks we've put together a new "Advocacy and > Marketing" website for PostgreSQL: > > http://advocacy.postgresql.org Cool :-) A few remarks: * [http://advocacy.postgresql.org/advantages/] """ ... A point list for some technical features that PostgreSQL offers: ... * Replication (available commercially) allowing the duplication of the database on multiple machines """ IIRC there is now a replication solution in contrib/ I've never used it though. So you can perhaps cut the "available commercially" There might be other commercial offerings I know nothing about. * "PostgreSQL : The worlds most advanced Open Source database" This probably isn't entirely true any more, considering the availability of SAP DB. I personally still stick with PostgreSQL, however, as I like it and it seems to have much momentum. * Allows you to win Bullshit-Bingo in 10 seconds. But that's by design ;-) * I don't like serif-fonts like "Times New Roman" on web pages. What about using a font declaration like (from my homepage): body { font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; background-color: #FFFFEE} throughout the site? -- Gerhard