| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |
| Date: | 2003-11-11 13:14:25 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0311111410270.11030-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Robert Treat writes:
> Honestly I would like to see gotchas type pages created for every database; if
> someone asks me why they should choose postgresql i have that covered, but if
> someone asks me why they might want to migrate from $ql server to postgresql,
> that would be a lot tougher since i don't have to regulary deal with it.
I don't think a list of gotchas is a reason to choose anything. I can
easily list gotchas of similar strength for PostgreSQL. What we would
need in order to get anyone to convert are facts or observations along the
better/faster/cheaper axes. Compared to MySQL, we do very well on all
three.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff | 2003-11-11 13:31:03 | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2003-11-11 13:00:45 | Re: FW: [webmaster] Comparison to MySQL |