Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?

From: Lukas Smith <smith(at)pooteeweet(dot)org>
To: Mark Woodward <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Date: 2006-05-20 08:36:25
Message-ID: 446ED509.8050908@pooteeweet.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

Hi,

I really think that PostgreSQL could benefit from a packaged solution
that incorporates a lot of the contrib stuff (tsearch2, maybe even some
replication setups ..). I really like the approach that PostgreSQL is a
clean yet highly extensible base from which other people can build their
specific tools.

However the fact of the matter is that MySQL provides a good enough, yet
very easy to setup and do semi advanced things (like full text,
replication etc). My key point here is _good enough_. This means there
is obviously still an opportunity to give them something _better_, as
long as it does not get in their way of being easy to setup.

The improvements to the installer are great, but there simply needs to
be a packaged solution that adds more of the things people are very
likely to use. From my understanding Bizgres goes in that direction? I
just think that whatever highly packaged solution PostgreSQL picks, this
should be the download that is pushed at conferences, in articles and
books. People with a clue will still know where they can get the clean base.

regards,
Lukas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-05-20 08:42:32 Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Previous Message Tino Wildenhain 2006-05-20 08:10:16 Re: OO PostgreSQL Driver

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-05-20 08:42:32 Re: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?
Previous Message Tino Wildenhain 2006-05-20 08:10:16 Re: OO PostgreSQL Driver