Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS

Tom Allison wrote:
> You've addressed cost and performance.
> Not much left.
>
> Try it out for yourself and see if it works for you.

+ elephant in logo
- unpronounceable name
+ excellent mailing lists
+ excellent developer community
- you can download as many copies as you like and a salesman still won't
take you out to lunch

If you want specific vs each DB...

MSSQL obviously integrates nicely with the rest of the MS developer
tools. If you're planning a .NET (TM) deployment over a range of Windows
(TM) systems and have a lot of experiences MS developers in-house then
it's perhaps the default choice.

Oracle has much more experience running on top-end hardware than PG. If
you've got the in-depth knowledge and/or the money then you can push it
further.

On the other hand, I can buy a 2-cpu x 4-core machine with 16GB RAM and
half-a-dozen disks for £5k from dell (not that you necessarily would).
That's a lot of oomph for the money - think what it would have cost five
years ago.

Add Debian + PostgreSQL, total cost=£5k.

Add Windows + SQL Server, total cost = £12k

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd