Dave Page wrote:
> In this case, it was stated that a customer would get better support, reliability and performance from EDB over their
existingPostgreSQL system. I believe they're using AS81 - do you know what version of PostgreSQL they were using?
6.3.2?7.1? 8.0.4? Even if it were also 8.1, the performance gains are feasible, given DynaTune and other tweaks, and we
maywell have found and fixed other bugs that aren't fixed in that PG version - we do have a buildfarm running something
like17000 (iirc) regression tests nightly over the server *and* connectors. We also ship additional management tools,
andreplication which the customer may be using to make their systems more reliable and fault tolerant.
I think the text makes it sound like this level of performance and
stability was unattainable using PostgreSQL. What you could have said
that this level of performance would be unattainable without manually
tuning the database. I guess moving to EDB AS is an update to software,
and they could as well updated to the latest PG version, so the
staleness of their install does not count.
Finally in regards to the comment about EDB AS having some features that
are not yet in the stable version of PG, I guess the door swings both
ways on that one? I mean there are bound to be some features making it
into PG stable releases not yet in EDB AS? Then again I guess you will
be very keen in quickly getting features into EDB AS that are of
interest to your customers, however if you fast track features too much
in EDB AS, you are bound to run into situations where your
implementation will not be compatible with the PG implementation, since
based on community feedback the implementation was changed. But if you
already have a stable version out there with your implementation you
will get into trouble.
regards,
Lukas
