On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, Andrew Payne wrote:
>
> Bruce asked an excellent question:
>
> > My question is, "What can we learn from MySQL?" I don't know there is
> > anything, but I think it makes sense to ask the question.
>
> After watching the traffic on this, the biggest MySQL lesson has gone
> largely unmentioned: that a well-funded, well-marketed, focused commercial
> entity clearly associated with the project can do wonders to overcome
> feature and technical shortcomings.
>
> At some point (probably there now), I think the lack of a "Postgres, Inc."
> is going to hinder adoption. Companies want to 'buy' from vendors that look
> like real, viable companies, and provide them products with support,
> training, features, and direction. With MySQL, you get one stop shopping.
> With Postgres, you've got to find and assemble the parts yourself. Most
> CIOs stop there, and start waiting for MySQL to get better before switching
> from Oracle.
I'm gonna disagree here. I think that not having a postgresql inc to go
to means that by the time postgresql becomes ubiquitous, it will be like
apache. no company behind it, every company using it. I.e. we'll earn
our stripes one at a time by proving we're the better database for 95% of
all purposes, and anyone not using postgresql will be behind the power
curve and doing themselves no favor. like CIO's who call Open Source
"Shareware" and believe that .net provides for a more efficient
programming environment, people who poo poo postgresql will find
themselves behind the 8 ball in the long run. No need for a postgresql
inc to do that, just time, good code, and knowledgable DBAs choosing it
more and more often.