Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle

Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 01:25:16PM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>>> The reality is, very few companies are willing to bet their a..erm,
>>> donkey ;) on PostgreSQL... yet.
>> I think this was true two years ago, but just about anybody here can
>> name a whole bunch of outfits (and probably is not allowed to name
>> others) that bet the farm on PostgreSQL. :)
>
> My point was that how many fortune 500 companies have
> mission-critical services that depend on PostgreSQL, especially if
> they're public-facing? Sure, some have... many more have not. The few
> that have are on the bleeding edge (which isn't so bloody afterall).

I find that the fortune 500 companies that are technical in nature are
already running PostgreSQL. Those that are of a different nature likely
aren't.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



--

SPI Liason, PostgreSQL Fundraising Group
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Find out about PostgreSQL Fundraising: http://fundraising.postgresql.org/
Read the PostgreSQL docs: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/