| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Nasby\, Jim" <JNasby(at)enovafinancial(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Differentiating different Open Source databases |
| Date: | 2011-05-16 10:09:30 |
| Message-ID: | m2oc33ot2d.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
"Nasby, Jim" <JNasby(at)enovafinancial(dot)com> writes:
> An opinion I often run across when talking to database people who haven't
> dealt with Postgres is "open source databases aren't very good". In all
Well I'm not sure how closely related/relevant it is, but I find more
and more people thinking they should take the NoSQL pill because frankly
you only get so far with Oracle and MySQL.
They should also hear the message that PostgreSQL is quite another
beast, and its role into your software architecture can be very
different from those first two. Because of technical facts and also
licencing policies, of course.
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nasby, Jim | 2011-05-16 22:56:13 | Re: Differentiating different Open Source databases |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2011-05-15 04:57:02 | Re: Crediting sponsors in release notes? |