Re: PostgreSQL DBA in SPAAAAAAAACE

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Vincent Veyron <vv(dot)lists(at)wanadoo(dot)fr>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Joe Miller <joe(dot)d(dot)miller(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL DBA in SPAAAAAAAACE
Date: 2011-12-24 23:21:51
Message-ID: CAOR=d=242uMcA1hmzmv9qpq=y0+5x=tAqngMApDCoOUMXaLiGw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Alban Hertroys <haramrae(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 24 Dec 2011, at 18:03, Vincent Veyron wrote:
>
>> Maybe you're right, it must be trap (just kidding, Joe).
>
>
> Perhaps those SQL server and Oracle DBA's were considered to be too expensive to put in such a volatile contraption and they opted for the free dude instead.
>
> But yeah, I'm surprised he/we won too. I consider it a compliment :)

It's a practical issue. They were afraid an Oracle or SQL Server DBA
would immediately start twiddling all the knobs and buttons to make it
work better. the pgsql guy will just sit back and watch until he's
needed.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Travers 2011-12-25 00:30:26 Re: Performance question: Commit or rollback?
Previous Message Alban Hertroys 2011-12-24 21:39:40 Re: PostgreSQL DBA in SPAAAAAAAACE