Re: PostgreSQL Advocacy, Thoughts and Comments

Cross-posted to "comp.databases.postgresql.advocacy" because I believe
this is something that should be considered for future additions to the
PostgreSQL advocacy web site.

"paul(at)tmsl(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk (Paul Thomas)" wrote in
comp.databases.postgresql.general:

> On 27/11/2003 09:19 Tony wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I've just been reading an article in PHP Architect magazine
>> (http://www.phparch.com) which is the cover story for October called
>> "Migrating from MySQL to PostgreSQL". I must say that this is a highly
>> compelling article, especially for me, and is aimed at programmers that
>> aren't necessarilly SQL experts or DBAs. For instance, like many PHP
>> Web developers who use MySQL instead of flat files to store stuff!
>> Instead of using a DB as a powerful tool. This article presents reasons
>> as to why a more standards compliant DB is good for programmers, and why
>> in some cases MySQL can be less of a friend to programmers than perhaps
>> PostgreSQL.
>>
>> I honestly believe that if the advocates of PostgreSQL wrote an article
>> or case study along the lines of this article, it would go a long way to
>> attracting many more programmers. In my experience all of the articles
>> and tutorials are written from the perspective of why PG is a better DB
>> as a DB. Rather than emphasise aspects like "PG is great because you
>> can move complicated code like this <insert complicated PHP/Perl code
>> here> ..... normally dealt programatically to your DB which can be both
>> faster and applied to any other programmers (VB, Java) that you are
>> sharing the important enterprise data with. I've not seen anything in
>> articles aimed at PHP/MySQL users saying, "Hey, look at how these
>> triggers can make your life soooo much easier" or "Hey, look at how
>> cascading can save you oh so much coding" or "Hey look at all this
>> programmatical logic that can be put into queries just by writing your
>> own functions"
>>
>> I have recently compared the PostgreSQL users to the Debian users (meant
>> as a complement) by the fact that they are in general highly
>> knowledgable of thier own subject and peripheral subjects too. They are
>> passionate and well versed, and happy to nudge people in the direction
>> of enlightenment without spoonfeeding them. But in the same way, the
>> advocacy (IMHO) falls into the same boat as Debian. There is a certain
>> self-assuredness that PostgreSQL is a far superior product and if
>> someone can't see how obvious that is then maybe PG isn't for them (a
>> little harsh I know but I'm trying to illustrate a point).
>>
>> My point is that there are thousands, tens of thousands of programmers
>> out there, that need to know why and how PG is so great. My eyes have
>> now been fully opened by this article, and got rid of my nagging feeling
>> that there was something great about PG that I "Just wasn't grasping,
>> and couldn't put my finger on". Maybe the advocacy team should be
>> aiming for all those programmers that desperately need PG, but don't
>> know it yet, and probably don't have time to garner enough DB experience
>> to understand why they need it!
>
> Maybe there's not such a need for the advanced features of PostgreSQL
> amongst PHP programmers as you seem to believe. Most of the PHP stuff
I've
> seen is read-only content display stuff and that doesn't really require a
> top-notch RDBMS; a more limited database should also be up to the job.
For
> complex transactional web applications, J2EE/Model II is a far superior
> technology to scripts/Model I and that means a different target audience
> for the apps where PostgreSQL can offer those essential extra features.
> Whilst most J2EE developers will be using Oracle/DB2/MSSQL as their
> back-end, the awareness of PostgreSQL seems quite high and, in the few
> usenet groups I monitor, I don't recall anyone being flamed for
> recommending PostgreSQL over MySQL. Maybe seasoned, professional
> developers don't like being told that they're crap programmers just
> because they ask for something as fundamental as referential integrity!
>
> Coming to your point about advocacy, I certainly don't recognize what you
> describe. Of course the members of the advocacy group believe in the
> quality of PostgreSQL (a view shared by most of the subscribers to list).
> What I think you need to bear in mind is that PostgreSQL is a genuinely
> open-source product _not_ a commercial product in GPL clothing like
MySQL.
> The developers and advocates are not making $xx per box shifted or trying
> to seduce users down a supposedly free path into their licensed software
> lair. That has a big effect on advocacy. Instead of smarmy marketing
types
> who rely on spread FUD and misinformation about every product they
> consider a competitor, we have a group of people acting with honesty and
> integrity. Welcome to the real world of open source :-)
>

--
Randolf Richardson - rr(at)8x(dot)ca
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Please do not eMail me directly when responding
to my postings in the newsgroups.