Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: "Tille, Andreas" <TilleA(at)rki(dot)de>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date: 2001-11-16 16:03:43
Message-ID: 3BF538DF.698B9D3B@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I just want to know now if this is an issue for PostgreSQL hackers:
> [X] yes
> [X] no
> [X] we are discussing about that
> In case of "no" I would be happy if you could provide me with some
> technical reasons which could help me arguing.

The hacker community has a wide range of interests.

From my POV, the overall performance of PostgreSQL is more than
competitive with other database products, including M$SQL. There is not
much point in arguing a specific query case, though we are happy to talk
about specific overall applications and to offer suggestions on how to
build databases that are generally well designed and that will perform
well on more than one product.

If you have a colleague who firmly believes that M$SQL is the best
solution, it sounds like he is not listening to all of the facts. That
certainly can be frustrating, eh? Maybe after a few more years of
crashed machines and increasing costs he will be more open to
alternatives ;)

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-11-16 16:12:28 Re: import/export of large objects on server-side
Previous Message Klaus Reger 2001-11-16 16:02:13 Re: import/export of large objects on server-side