Re: Uber moving towards MySQL

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 06:24:09AM -0700, Robert Bernier wrote:
> Although no way near as knowledgeable as many of you regarding the
> inner workings of MySQL, let alone postgres, I do however recognize
> navel gazing when I see it. The first article starting this thread was
> a convoluted justification of one's own religion. This second article
> is pure commercial leveraging of a thread that's garnered a lot of
> attention.
>
> It's time a response from the postgres community was forthcoming.

I think this new blog post does a good job of summarizing the issues
Uber had with Postgres.  The blog comments correct some things, get some
things wrong, but eventually right.  (The thread about disk performance
can be ignored.)

In some ways any PR is good PR, and I see the general issue being that
Uber didn't like some of the technical decisions we made, and tradeoffs
we decided, but few are saying those decisions were wrong, just focused
on different workloads.

I do think we are winning when we don't act defensively but are open to
criticism --- I think it shows confidence, and I think we have a right
to be confident.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +