Re: db-engines Ranking for PostgreSQL

On 5 Dec 2013 23:52, "Robert Treat" <rob@xzilla.net> wrote:
>
> (woops, re-sending to OP as I forgot to cc the list)
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:23 AM, Sameer Kumar <sameer.kumar@ashnik.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I was recently going through the ranking of Databases given by db-engines.com
> >
> > PostgreSQL was ranked 5th, with a score 7 times lesser than Oracle and 6times lesser than MySQL. You can check their ranking Algorithm over here:
> > http://db-engines.com/en/ranking_definition
> >
>
> The one question I always wondered about that was when they track
> PostgreSQL, do they also include "Postgres". I think we're
> particularly more susceptible to this problem than other databases.
>
That's a good point. I myself search "Postgres" more often that PostgreSQL.
Let me reply to these people.

I doubt that will make much of a difference...
- Google lists 12.5 mio hits for "PostgreSQL database" and 3.8 mio for "Postgres database" (which they claim to look at).
- I guess by the nature of our beloved system (and its outstanding docs), you'll tend to find significantly less mentions/noob questions on {DBA,''} Stackexchange and the like... Postgres' quality is its curse in this case...  ;-)
- re. Job offers, we might want to mention "Postgre" as well ;-/  (Not that it would matter a lot, Oracle & M{y,s}sql are clearly in front there)

Just my 2p,

-- 
Gunnar "Nick" Bluth
RHCE/SCLA

Mobil +49 172 8853339
Email: gunnar.bluth@pro-open.de
__________________________________________________________________________
In 1984 mainstream users were choosing VMS over UNIX. Ten years later
they are choosing Windows over UNIX. What part of that message aren't you
getting? - Tom Payne