Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Mark Cave-Ayland <m(dot)cave-ayland(at)webbased(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?
Date: 2005-10-07 03:00:58
Message-ID: 28539.1128654058@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> - All the companies that have tried to operate by selling PostgreSQL
>> support services have gone bankrupt, except for EnterpriseDB.

> Oh the irony....

Actually, AFAIR the *only* such company that's gone under was Great
Bridge; and in their case it wasn't that there wasn't a viable business
case, it was that the board of directors got cold feet during the 2001
dot-com bust, and refused to continue putting money into it according
to the original business plan. Other longtime supporters such as SRA
and PostgreSQL Inc are still around; and while Red Hat is not being as
vocal about it as they once were, they are still paying me to work on
Postgres.

So, yeah, the above claim is just FUD. It'd be interesting to ask some
hard questions about exactly how solid MySQL AB's finances are ... and
how many other support options users will have if they go under.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-10-07 03:15:15 Re: PostgreSQL Gotchas --- count()
Previous Message CN 2005-10-07 02:58:26 Re: pg_restore --disable-triggers does not stop triggers