Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL?

On Thu, 2002-08-01 at 22:39, Curt Sampson wrote:
> On 1 Aug 2002, Greg Copeland wrote:
>
> > For some reason,
> > many of the developers are under the impression that even if code is
> > never touched, it has a very high level of effort to keep it in the code
> > base.  That is, of course, completely untrue.
>
> Where does this "of course" come from? I've been programming for quite a
> while now, and in my experience every line of code costs you something
> to maintain.

Please re-read my statement.  Your assertion and my statement are by no
means exclusionary.  "Of course" was correctly used and does correctly
apply, however, it doesn't appear it was correctly comprehended by you
as it applied in context.  I agree with your statement of, "...every
line of code costs you something to maintain..." which in no way, shape,
or form contradicts my statement of, "...it has a very high level of
effort...of course not...".  Fact is, if code which is never touched and
requires a very level of effort to maintain, chances are you screwed up
somewhere.

Hopefully we can agree that "...costs you something..." does not have to
mean, "...very high level of effort..."
As long as there's any interaction with other parts of
> the system, you have to test it regularly, even if you don't need to
> directly change it.

No one said otherwise.  Perhaps you were replying to someone else?!  :)

>
> That said, if you've been doing regular work on postgres code base and you
> say that it's cheap to maintain, I'll accept that.

Please re-read my statement.  In my mind, this was implicately
understood from the statement I made.

Shesh...sure hope I remembered to dot all my "i's"...

Greg