Re: PostgreSQL Timeline - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From MARK CALLAGHAN
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Timeline
Date
Msg-id CAFbpF8P=D_RM30rpNAZKJ-tDBak8oEvUd66+8mTR=Qam0Uj9-g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Timeline  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-advocacy
The sources I listed claim that Paraccel used the PG optimizer in an early release and uses no PG code today. Another source states that Vertica has no PG code. Why do you describe these as forks?


On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
On 09/18/2013 11:31 AM, MARK CALLAGHAN wrote:
> Where are the references that Vertica is sort-of a PG fork and that
> Paraccel is a PG fork? Quick searches of the interweb finds claims that
> they are not. Not sure you need to bring doubt to the rest of the details
> in an excellent slide deck.

That depends on your definition of "fork".  There are things which are
forks which are 90% community Postgres code, and things which are 30%
Postgres code.  What percentage makes something a fork, and what
doesn't, and why?

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



--
Mark Callaghan
mdcallag@gmail.com

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Timeline
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Timeline