Robert Treat wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 April 2004 15:12, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > You know, that's kind of the point of all things related to MySQL.
> > "It's better than nothing." PostgreSQL doesn't do things because "it's
> > better than nothing." <snip>
> > (Same as how MySQL guesses the result of a modulo operation, and gets it
> > wrong. They don't care and you can read that on the manual. In
> > Postgres, this is a bug.)
> >
>
> Hey Alvaro,
> are you familiar with "worse is better" philosphy in software development and
> how that leads to adoption rates? It basically states that simplicity is the
> ultimate design goal over correctness, consitency, and completness. Because
> of this more people are able to quickly adopt a technology, which allows the
> incorrectness/inconsistency/incompletness to be address by new comers and
> gradually bring the software up to higher standards. I was reading some
> blogs the other day that applied this to PHP's adoption rate over Java and
> .net, but your comment made me think this really applies to my$ql and
> postgresql as well. check out
> http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1121502&postcount=2 for a bit
> more.
Interesting analysis.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
