| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)karlpinc(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-www(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Describing Postgres as "object-relational" on the home page |
| Date: | 2023-12-26 20:17:41 |
| Message-ID: | ZYs05Vx59gseoQEY@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 01:10:47PM -0600, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't want to start bikeshedding here but maybe
> the answer is simple.
>
> The PG home page calls PG "object-relational". I question
> whether this is useful. Unlike in the 90's, nobody is
> really interested any more in object-oriented-everything
> and the typical person reading the home page probably
> does not know what an object-relational db is anyway.
>
> It may be better to just say "relational".
I guess if I had to name this with no precedence, I would call it
relational/extendable, but that seems even worse that what we have. I
do think we need something to explain that Postgres is more than simply
relational since our extendibility, along with our open source
development, are what make us popular.
I agree "object" isn't a great word, and as I heard was just used in the
1990's because object languages were the hot topic.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2023-12-26 21:21:06 | Re: Describing Postgres as "object-relational" on the home page |
| Previous Message | Karl O. Pinc | 2023-12-26 19:10:47 | Describing Postgres as "object-relational" on the home page |