Re: Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL
От | Alex Knight |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.33.0106271620390.18309-100000@blowfish.phunc.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: Red Hat to support PostgreSQL (teg@redhat.com (Trond Eivind Glomsrød)) |
Список | pgsql-general |
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > > > Even though it may appear that your server is doing a lot, it's not facing > > > > the load of a highly scaled enterprise level e-commerce site, where RedHat > > > > just doesn't cut it. > > > > > > That claim is bogus. Red Hat Linux is the number one linux by far in > > > enterprise deployments. > > > > And MS has more enterprise deployments than RH. Does that make MS > > better than RH? > > No, but they aren't a toy either - while they are closed source, and > trying to force you to their world as much as possible and restricting > freedom (like upgrading your machine when running XP) and a monopolist > blatantly using their force in the desktop market to increase adoption > of new products (hailstorm, IE, original NT server etc), NT isn't just > a toy anymore. > > All I'm pointing out is that Red Hat Linux does cut in at enterprise > level e-commerce cites (we're powering a few of those) - some may not > like the product, more don't like Red Hat, but Red Hat Linux is a > good and valid alternative. Whether is right for you, depend on your > needs, sum you're willing to spend (few things beat Sun Starfire :) > and the expertise you have or can build up. > -- > Trond Eivind Glomsrød > Red Hat, Inc. You make a good point Trond. It certainly does power _some_ of the sites, and it certainly suites more than a few happy people. -Knight
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: