| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Timeline |
| Date: | 2013-09-18 20:09:52 |
| Message-ID: | 523A0890.4080800@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 09/18/2013 12:25 PM, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> The sources I listed claim that Paraccel used the PG optimizer in an early
> release and uses no PG code today. Another source states that Vertica has
> no PG code. Why do you describe these as forks?
A quick test demonstrates pretty clearly that Vertica is using a forked
version of psql as its client, at least. Given this use of Pg code,
it's fairly likely that there's PG code elsewhere as well; to date,
Stonebraker has reused some Postgres code in every one of his projects.
And the Paraccel engineers say differently than that article does.
Possible management has an issue with admitting the amount they owe to
Postgres, given that they've never contributed to the project. At lease
Netezza was honest about it (as were Aster and Greenplum).
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-09-18 20:14:37 | Re: PostgreSQL Timeline |
| Previous Message | MARK CALLAGHAN | 2013-09-18 17:25:19 | Re: PostgreSQL Timeline |