Re: need for concrete info

Quoting Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)fireserve(dot)net>:

> I've been using PG very lightly for quite awhile, (although I"ve read
> through all but the programmer's manual once or twice). I loved when I
> got to PG and it had Oracle like features, "A real database!". This is
> after using MySQL, which I first though, "I'm programming a website off
> a simple, easy to use, non msoft product, yippee!".
>
> Well, now I am writing a proposal, which among many other points,
> proposes to switch from the current hosting site of a non profit to a
> slightly more expensive one running PostgreSQL, (where I have some other
> projects.) I want to use as my main argument, the fact (at this time,
> only from my previous usage), that MySQL really doesn't have foreign
> keys or record locking, and Postgres does.
>
> I will be trusted to say this, and I don't have to reprint the manuals
> from each DB in my proposal, or maybe I will. But anyway, I'm still
> correct with today's MySQL vs. PostgreSQL, right? I *really* want to use
> PostgreSQL for this project and not MySQL as I want to avoid growing
> pains trying to get MySQL to do the job of a bigger DB down the road.
>
> --
> "You are behaving like a man",
> is an insult from some women,
> a compliment from an good woman.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

Dennis,

I used to go through this a lot too especially several years ago and I have to
admit it becomes a hard sell in many cases since quite often the person signing
the check *wants* a certain afiliation- "I hear Oracle is the way to go, so we
want you to go that way". After awhile, I got tired of trying to educate
people. I simply give them my recommendation and some bullet-points about why I
think they should use this or that. Generally I'm technology neutral but
recently, I've started including verbage in my proposals mentioning what my
application environment is (Linux, Apache, PostgreSQL, etc). That was actually
done because of all problem with MS products (viruses, worms, security, etc).
In doing that, I found that folks are less likely to ask questions about the
"environment" because they're not gonna understand all the little integration
points but with a product they think they do.

Still you could ave a million reasons why
one product is better than the other that might not get the buy in. Some shirt
may say, "no, I heard SAP is working with
MySQL and SAP is a great company so can you do that?"- hopefully you're not
dealing with that type of ignorance. I'm sure you've heard some pretty idiotic
reasons people come up with to NOT use PostgreSQL too.

These threads on MySQL vs. PostgreSQL keep coming up and to me its kinda
interesting because it not even an apples to apples comparison but obviously its
relevant out there. I would take a different approach if I were asked and say
something like, "MySQL doesn't meet my company's criteria for developing
applications for reliable data storage and management". At the very least,
you'll draw and eyebrow or two and be asked to explain. Now, you can hit them
with the details. I would even preface your answers with, "Well, after looking
in MySQL, I found that it can to <whatever feature> but as PostgreSQL has had
these features a lot longer. I would not want to risk YOUR DATA to such a product."

I'm sure you get the idea. :)

Good luck!

--
Keith C. Perry
Director of Networks & Applications
VCSN, Inc.
http://vcsn.com

____________________________________
This email account is being host by:
VCSN, Inc : http://vcsn.com