Re: 8.0 Press Release, Draft Two - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Greg Sabino Mullane |
---|---|
Subject | Re: 8.0 Press Release, Draft Two |
Date | |
Msg-id | 1e8d41cc8823967c894b5c72cfce8a94@biglumber.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | 8.0 Press Release, Draft Two (<josh@bitbuckets.com>) |
Responses |
Re: 8.0 Press Release, Draft Two
Re: 8.0 Press Release, Draft Two |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 My critique of this version: > August 24, 2004 - The PostgreSQL Global Development group today announced > the availability of the landmark 8.0 version of the PostgreSQL ORDBMS. > PostgreSQL, created in 1986 by UC Berkeley, is the most advanced open > source database in existence today. Version 8 is the collective work of > over 200 developers. "Hundreds" sounds better than 200. Too many numbers in the paragraph already. "landmark" sounds a bit odd. ORDBMS should be spelled out, as should UC. Actually, I would drop the whole "created in 1986" part - what does it gain us? "in existence today" is a redundant. Just "today" or "in the world" or "available". We might want to mention our firendly license somewhere in here. > PostgreSQL 8.0 contains many new features that make the database a viable > contender in the enterprise against the likes of Oracle and DB2. The full > list can be found at the PostgreSQL website, but some of the major > features include: Perhaps put URL with mention of the website. Lose "enterprise". "viable contendor" is too weak of a phrase. "solid contendor"? "competitor?" > Native Windows Support: PostgreSQL now works natively with Windows > operating systems and does not need an emulation layer. This provides a > big speed boost under Windows and makes PostgreSQL a viable replacement > for Microsoft SQL Server. Maybe remove "operating" from "Windows operating systems". "big speed boost" is a little vague. "viable" is again a little weak. Perhaps "allows an upgrade from Microsoft SQL Server?" :) > Savepoints: Savepoints allow specific parts of a transaction to be > aborted without affecting the whole transaction. This feature, funded by > Fujitsu, is valuable for application developers who require error recovery > within complex transactions. Should we mention the phrase "nested transactions"? Would that be familiar to some people, or is that a PostgreSQLism? > Point In Time Recovery: PITR expands the PostgreSQL enterprise feature set > by providing the ability to recover data to the point of failure or to any > transaction in the past. "enterprise feature set" pretty fluffy. Would read the same to simply say "PITR provides the ability..." Maybe say "any time" in the past instead of "transaction" > Tablespaces: This feature, funded by Fujitsu, allows the database > administrator to choose which filesystems are used for schemas, tables, > and indexes. This allows the administrator to place whole databases on > separate disks to improve performance. Is it really "filesystems"? > Along with the new features come some new addins: "addins" a real word? - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200408291846 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFBMl0pvJuQZxSWSsgRAqmNAKCdT4/tg+5nKuPhUojblzhX4CFTiACgm5fy pWsdtUivIkTLDqqIPZHbGAw= =rhts -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
pgsql-advocacy by date: