Re: PostgreSQL Advocacy, Thoughts and Comments - Mailing list pgsql-general

Tony <tony@unihost.net> Wrote:
>  Now many
> consultant/developer/sys-admins like myself are going to client site on
> a contract (this is especially true in the UK, I can't speak for
> anywhere else) and finding complex stocktrading systems, inventory
> systems, CRM systems, and others, all written in PHP backed by MySQL.

I started the CRM system I am developing on MySQL before realizing it was
the wrong choice.  Part of it is simple because people have heard of the
software and don't have the time/stamina/patience to do proper research into
the benefits of alternatives.  There is also a learning curve when going
from MySQL to a more standards-compliant RDBMS like PostgreSQL.  Heck, I
found that going from PostgreSQL to Firebird give me headaches :-P  And
these RDBMS's have most of the same features!

> Whether this is right or wrong, good choice or bad choice is not what
> I'm interested in debating.   The point is that when these systems where
> architected, the developers used MySQL not because they were dumb, but
> because many of them develop awesome code and can get around most
> problems in the code, with a little ingenuity.  Many simply do not have
> the insight into the potential benefits of *proper* RDBMS can offer.

I would actually venture to say that many of them are using the RDBMS as a
sort of object-persistance store, and not really trying to use the
*relational* features of the software.  They might as well be using Berkeley
DB 4.  I know that is how I started with MySQL.

What most of these programmers do not understand is that an RDBMS is not
simply a search-engine for stored persistant objects, but is actually a
fully-featured information storage management system.  With the right
features, this information can be stored, queried, presented in another
form, etc. all while ensuring that the stored information is EXACTLY what
was intended. The tasks that the RDBMS handles include data storage,
integrity enforcement, and data presentation.  Most MySQL programmers only
use it for data storage.  Sadly, this is about all MySQL is good for, and
hence the barrier to learning how to USE a REAL RDBMS are a bit higher
because of the prevalence of the likes of MySQL and MS Access.

> The second scenario, is with admin systems, written by people like
> myself for companies, whether they be simple or complex systems, that
> are intended as a temporary work around to an immediate problem.
> In a very short space of time the stop-gap application you had written
> to sort out the immediate problem quickly becomes a core business
> application (I recently returned to a site after not being there for two
> years and the temporary address book/ email system that I knocked up in
> an afternoon was not only still being used, but now relied upon heavily).

But again, if you start with the right tools, it is easier to modify later
to adapt to changing needs.  I think that this is one of the messages we
should be presenting.  With updateable views, different applications can
even have access to different presentations of the data.

> So on to my point, MySQL guys will happily say "Hey, we're not saying
> that the features MySQL is missing aren't important, and we're working
> towards them, but in the meantime these issues can be worked around like
> this....."  and happily play the whole thing down.  Many LAMP developers
> aren't aware of the benefits of stored procedures, of triggers and other
> good stuff. Like myself, if they were aware how much easier life could
> be if these things were accessible to them, they'd probably be converts
too.

Agreed completely.  Now we just have to sell the PostgreSQL solution.  Here
is what the MySQL people will say (and we need good evidence to counter):
1:  MySQL is faster.
2:  MySQL has more community support.
3:  MySQL has replication as part of its core distribution.  MySQL's
replication is better tested...

> There is not enough emphasis put on the basic importance of these
> functions in PG.  Someone needs to standup and say "Hey, look how this
> can simplify your programming lives"  until I started using
> Druid/Postgres, I had no idea why I needed triggers or what a cascade
> effect did, or why I might want one.

The basic issue is that many programmers are not taught to value information
management systems, such as RDBMS's.  These programmers are interested only
in the data storage issues of the database, and not on how to use it to
manage the information stored therein. Changing this may take a lot of
effort.  Also, using an RDBMS to its full extent rubs some OO programmers
the wrong way because it strikes them as violating rules of OO design.  Of
course, then why not use an OO database? ;-)

> The Linux  community has grown  at least in part because it has
> educated  potential users and journo's to its benefits.  I believe if
> the PG advocacy team did the same, then it would attract many more
> serious LAMP developers.

I agree.  But it will take some time to sell, and will require some
extremely basic work to get going.

> I'd gladly help out with such a paper, but find myself in the sad
> position of my prose being open to attack due to my newbieness in the DB
> world and not able to speak authoratatively on the subject.

I would be happy to help out as well.  How about a paper entitled:
Why PostgreSQL?
It would cover why PostgreSQL is ideal for serious application development.

Note, I have only about 2 years experience with PostgreSQL, and so I would
feel more comfortable with lengthy peer review of whatever I write, but I am
reasonably familiar with both worlds, and can make a strong case for
PostgreSQL, I think.

> Have a think, I'd like to know if others agree.
>
> Cheers
>
> T.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>                http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>