| From: | "Reuven M(dot) Lerner" <reuven(at)lerner(dot)co(dot)il> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Stability, PR |
| Date: | 2002-05-22 21:42:03 |
| Message-ID: | 15596.4267.281771.691000@henrietta-szold.lerner.co.il |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
I've been using PostgreSQL for several years now, and have been
extremely happy during that entire time period.
Over the last 4-6 weeks, however, several potential clients
questioning my choice of PostgreSQL, saying that it has a reputation
for instability. These comments didn't come from people who are
against using open-source software; my choice of Linux, Apache,
mod_perl, Zope, or OpenACS (depending on the project) was generally
applauded.
I've managed to convince each of these clients that PostgreSQL is
indeed a reliable database. But I I still have to wonder: Is there
any truth to these statements? Is it simply FUD, or was PostgreSQL
once prone to data corruption?
Given the frequency with which I've heard such claims from otherwise
well-informed people, I'm wondering if there's anything we users can
(or should) do to counter this misinformation.
Reuven
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-05-22 22:07:25 | Re: multiple version running |
| Previous Message | philip johnson | 2002-05-22 21:36:59 | multiple version running |