Re: [GENERAL] Re: Is PostgreSQL ready for ...

At 01:18 AM 23-11-1999 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> If the priorities include stability and reliability, that's what you get.
>> If the priorities are features at any cost, you get junk.
>>
>> Though Open Source projects are less susceptible to featuritis, they're far
>> from immune. Trouble is many PHBs only compare stuff feature by brochure
>> feature.
>
>We only do 2-3 major releases a year for a reason.  If it is not
>reliable, it is useless.  This is not a computer game.

Yep. Glad to hear that.

My boss asked "MSSQL or Postgres" and a colleague and I said "Postgres". I
figured we'd have fewer problems with Postgres, so what if we couldn't
point fingers at someone else, better to get things done/fixed. Still good
to hear that reliability is high on your list.

Another colleague, was an Oracle guy and was nervous about Postgres - coz
if anything goes wrong he may have to help :). But Oracle was way too
pricey- we could have bought a house at the price they gave us...

In contrast: Netscape proudly proclaimed that when it was a choice between
features and stability, features always won. Explains a lot.

Cheerio,

Link.