Re: Bug#97550: upgrading to postgresql 7.1
Wouter Verhelst <wouter.verhelst@advalvas.be> writes:
> On 28 May 2001, David N. Welton wrote:
> > <database flamewars>
> > >From what I have seen of both, overall, postgresql is a much nicer,
> > more professional system, with more features, and more tools to manage
> > it.
> > </database flamewars>
> ... But that has been abandoned by its original developers, while
> being in a poorly documented state, because it was poorly
> implemented too.
Err, not really. Not any more than other free software has been
passed on to new people as previous contributors have gone on to other
things (see Debian, the Gimp and other examples). In reality,
previous implementations of 'postgresql' went on to form the cores of
successful proprietary databases.
http://www.ca.postgresql.org/docs/devhistory.html
> Which meant the adopting developers of PostgreSQL had a lot of
> problems concerning stability initially.
They had to spend some time delving into the code and understanding
it, more than anything. Any big project takes ramp up time.
> I didn't look at it recently, though -- this could be fixed.
I was able to use postgresl in a production environment in '98 without
problems. At the time it was also the only high-quality database that
was free.
Mysql is ok as a beginner's database, I guess, for small web sites,
but postgresql just seems to be more thorough, and user friendly.
--
David N. Welton
Free Software: http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
Personal: http://www.efn.org/~davidw/
Work: http://www.innominate.com/
Reply to: