Re: Are we losing momentum?

Gretings!

[2003-04-14 19:54] Tom Lane said:
| Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
| > Several people have asked if we are losing momentum.

| I don't know what we can do about it, other than maybe push harder to
| get some more PG titles into O'Reilly's catalog ... that would help
| narrow the bookshelf gap a little, at least. Any wannabee authors
| out there? (And Bruce, your book is due for a second edition...)

I've wanted to pipe up in a few of these "popularity"
discussions in the past. Seeing how I can't make time to
participate in any other meaningful capacity, I'll share
my thoughts on _why_ mysql has the mindshare.

Applications, specifically applications that _use_ mysql.

A quick search over at freshmeat returns 1044 results for
"mysql" and 260 for "postgresql". Before this turns into a
cause/effect discussion, I want to state up front that the
real "effect" of this is that someone is 4 times as likely to
download an application that uses mysql. Sure, many are
"trivial" applications, but I posit that it is _specifically_
these "trivial" applications that inoculate the uninitiated
with the belief that mysql is suitable for use in real, albeit
trivial applications. Additionally, it these rudimentary
applications that will be studied by many as the way to write
a database application.

It is all good and well that postgres /can/ do, but until
the application developers see that those features are
valuable enough to forgo mysql support, they'll write the
application to support whatever database is most likely to
_already_ be installed, which will be mysql. Granted,
many developers will also try to support multiple dbs via
the language's db api, but this leaves the less-supported
dbs in an even worse position; being relegated to an
"might work with XXX database". When anxious user learns
that "might" currently means "doesn't," the second-string
database looks even worse in the eyes of the user.

How to solve this problem? This is the hard part, but
luckily ISTM that there are a few ways to succeed. Neither
of which involves marketing or writing books.

1) become active in the "also supports postgres" projects,
and add features that are made available _because_ of
postgres' superiority. Eventually, market pressure
for the cool feature(s) will lead users to choose
postgres, and mysql could be relegated to the "also
runs on mysql, with limited featureset"
2) take a popular project that uses mysql, fork it, and
add features that can only be implemented using posgres.
3) release that super-cool code that you've been hacking
on for years, especially if it is a "trivial" app.
4) convince your employer that it would be _beneficial_ to
them to release, as open source, the internal app(s) you've
developed, using postgres-specific features. (This is
about all I can claim to be doing at this point in my
indentured servitude, and I can't say I'm doing a good
job... :-/)

I'm sure this idea is not original, but I'm also sure that
it _is_ the answer to gaining market^Wmindshare in this
database market.

(I must apologize in advance, that I might not have time
to even follow this thread, in fact, I hope that instead of
replying to this, the potential respondent might consider
helping to increase the number of apps that require postgres
:-)

wishing-I-could-contribute-more-ly yours,
brent

--
"Develop your talent, man, and leave the world something. Records are
really gifts from people. To think that an artist would love you enough
to share his music with anyone is a beautiful thing." -- Duane Allman