Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
От | Lukas Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 446ED509.8050908@pooteeweet.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? ("Mark Woodward" <pgsql@mohawksoft.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, I really think that PostgreSQL could benefit from a packaged solution that incorporates a lot of the contrib stuff (tsearch2, maybe even some replication setups ..). I really like the approach that PostgreSQL is a clean yet highly extensible base from which other people can build their specific tools. However the fact of the matter is that MySQL provides a good enough, yet very easy to setup and do semi advanced things (like full text, replication etc). My key point here is _good enough_. This means there is obviously still an opportunity to give them something _better_, as long as it does not get in their way of being easy to setup. The improvements to the installer are great, but there simply needs to be a packaged solution that adds more of the things people are very likely to use. From my understanding Bizgres goes in that direction? I just think that whatever highly packaged solution PostgreSQL picks, this should be the download that is pushed at conferences, in articles and books. People with a clue will still know where they can get the clean base. regards, Lukas
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: