| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |
| Date: | 2006-10-10 18:50:44 |
| Message-ID: | 5175.1160506244@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> * MySQL is used as a primary development platform.
> Another good reason.
Actually that's *the* reason --- it's always going to be hard for
Postgres to look good for an application that's been designed/optimized
for MySQL. The application has already made whatever compromises it
had to for that platform, and dropping it onto a different DB won't
magically undo them.
Some days I think database independence is a myth.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Browne | 2006-10-10 18:54:58 | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-10-10 18:35:30 | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Browne | 2006-10-10 18:54:58 | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-10-10 18:35:30 | Re: more anti-postgresql FUD |