Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 01:12:07AM -0300, Guido Barosio wrote:
>> http://www.cioupdate.com/trends/article.php/3689871
>
> The reason MySQL shows and PostgreSQL doesn't is that there's all kinds
> of other OSS projects that use MySQL, so it ends up in the door that
> way. It's also got way more people that know it.
I have actually been researching this a bit and there are a couple of
things that are coming into play with the people I talk to:
1. A lot more people know MySQL and thus can be hired, and in theory be
immediately productive.
2. MySQL people are cheaper. On average from the people I talk to 30-40%
cheaper than a qualified PostgreSQL DBA.
>
> PostgreSQL OTOH typically only goes into an organization if they either
> run into problems they can't solve in MySQL or if there's a (loud)
> internal advocate.
Or there are people in the know. Which is often the case.
>
> This is why I disagree with the notion that MySQL isn't our
> competition... this shows how it's popularity ends up hurting us.
It kind of depends. The reality is, regardless of what all of us Pg
zealots would like to think, is that MySQL is now buzzword compliant. It
really doesn't matter a hoot whether or not the buzzword compliance is
of a solid implementation or not.
But then again, it hasn't hurt us yet and I don't think it will. I would
rather have 1000 customers who make intelligent decisions about their
infrastructure than 5000 that are ignorant buffoons who spend more time
listening to sales people than actually making knowledgeable decisions.
From the, "Command Prompt doesn't employ any sales people dept.",
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
