Jason Hihn wrote:
> That's only part of it. Since I'm a developer, I think more software
is
> key.
> Getting products that require MySQL is a big downside to PostgreSQL.
Most
> of
> the time too, those products are great and win over a lot of people.
> (vBulletin, Slashdot.org) Of course those were written for MySQL for
all
> the
> wrong reasons as well. Such famous apps give MySQL credibility where
it
> should not. (Well, I can't say that technically - I have to say that
the
> app
> designers chose MySQL, for what reasons, we don't know (usually
popularity
> but it may have been more analytical than that.) but somehow Joe blow
> things
> MySQL will be good for his app too)
>
> So I see our problem more one of popularity for apps. Why that is, is
> another question.
MySQL works just fine for your typical web app and is optimized for that
purpose. For example, they added a query caching feature which IMHO is
useless except in a web environment. Their catering to the web crowd
has helped establish them in the public eye.
Postgres is the database of choice for business apps. This is a tough
market to crack because of the conservatism of business planners and
their well funded ability to buy top dollar software. Databases are
like boxing: if two players go the distance, the judges give it to the
champ.
I think in the long run, the 'business first' strategy will prevail.
Database developers who can solve business problems usually make a lot
more money than web developers. Since the dot.com fallout, this
disparity has increased. This means a despite a smaller user base, the
postgres community will be better funded and enjoy more of the top
talent. Also, postgres has enjoyed and will continue to enjoy better
support from the academic community because of its closer adherence to
the relational model, maybe the closest of any major dbms.
As for the companion apps, postgres is much less reliant on external
tools than other dbs because of the extremely powerful client
interfaces. I would like to see better dts services and better xml
support (xml/edi) for adoption by businesses. A win32 port is
absolutely crucial to start zapping sql server, which has virtually no
direct competition for 2nd tier database deployments, and also to the
embedded market which now relies on mysql, access, or FoxPro.
Also, integration with Delphi/Kylix could use some press. This is a
fantastic rad environment for win32/linux.
Merlin
