Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0
От | Christopher Browne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgres v MySQL 5.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 87pscl1865.fsf@wolfe.cbbrowne.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Postgres v MySQL 5.0 ("Duncan Garland" <duncan.garland@ntlworld.com>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Oops! pgsql@007Marketing.com (Shane Ambler) was seen spray-painting on a wall: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > >> I would further argue that many of the features being pushed for 8.3, >> recursive queries, bitmap indexes, rollup/group by, updateable queries >> are the direct result of positioning either against Oracle/MSSQL or >> MySQL pending feature sets. (Although more toward Oracle/MSSQL certainly). > > Wanting to implement features that postgresql users want and ask for > does not say we are positioning against db's that have implemented > them before us. Indeed. It seems to me that the features added to TheirSQL over the last two years *do* amount to "positioning;" had they not suffered from the problem of vital underlying technologies being bought out by other vendors, they would have been in an excellent position to position as "strong enough to be an SAP R/3 engine." With stored procs and triggers as further extras, encouraged by other use cases. > We may hear about these features and start drooling and running polls > to see if we can convince every other postgresql user to want them > included in the next version, but that is because we want the feature > and think it would be useful not because we want to compete directly > with Oracle/MSSQL/MySQL. It appears to me that the system most nearly "positioned against" is more DB2 than anything else. And I think that's accidental; it's just that both PostgreSQL and DB2 have a habit of intentional conformance with SQL standards. > It is thinking of and implementing features before the others (or just > doing them better) that gives us something to brag about and use when > comparing with the other db's. Ultimately, it's the Nifty Applications that give *real* bragging rights. What is nice is that PostgreSQL offers some ways of getting substantial functionality very compactly, which can offer considerable elegance. This tends to be difficult with applications designed for another DB, or for "DB agnosticism;" I have had the recent joy of some involvement in generating new app code that doesn't have those legacy issues, and there is considerable elegance to be had in writing a PostgreSQL-specific application. It feels rather good. -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com") http://linuxdatabases.info/info/linuxdistributions.html Rules of the Evil Overlord #161. "I will occasionally vary my daily routine and not live my life in a rut. For example, I will not always take a swig of wine or ring a giant gong before finishing off my enemy." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: