Re: Why new users come to PostgreSQL (IMHO) - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Chris Travers
Subject Re: Why new users come to PostgreSQL (IMHO)
Date
Msg-id CAKt_Zfu1tK4a1G3VXa9iagYXkVvoarrZSbzYzgQ_B=hxx9pTNg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Why new users come to PostgreSQL (IMHO)  (Jean-Paul Argudo <jean-paul@postgresqlfr.org>)
Responses Re: Why new users come to PostgreSQL (IMHO)
List pgsql-advocacy


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Jean-Paul Argudo <jean-paul@postgresqlfr.org> wrote:

> I don't think I've ever seen this much positive feeling about
> postgres.

+1

Exciting times, like being a Linux admin before that got to be mainstream ;-). 

> Maybe it's the industry getting tired of Oracle,

They do. I see here a lots of migrations or professionals willing to
do so. And that's not only on the public sector, and most of the time,
for critical matters.

It's most of the time due to Oracle's princing and sales methods.
PostgreSQL is, at first, judged like a "cheap" database. 

Once the customers use PostgreSQL, they stay with it for all other
reasons, like:
* not having to ask companies'buyers for more licences
* flexibility
* extensibility
* not-a-blackbox (usefull logs, and nothing like "call metalink if you
wanna know about a023c231f or ORA-600 stuff)
* extensive, comprehensive and usefull documentation
* etc (we all know here that list)

As an Oracle replacement though our approach to change management is entirely different.  We lack the ability to have side-by-side versioning (edition-based redefinition is basically that) of stored procedures but we have transactional DDL which Oracle entirely lacks. 

.. and they understand that coming to PostgreSQL is nothing cheap,
just because:
* training costs
* consultancy costs
* migration costs (when needed, most of the time, they let version N
die an re-code version N+1 with PostgreSQL)
* support costs (when the community support is not sufficient in terms
of SLA for example (yes it's not about knowledge but more like insurance))

But they still stay with PostgreSQL because costs tends to lower with
time, when they do feel stronger with PostgreSQL (knowledge++,
external help--), and, first, because all the advantages it has! :-)


Not just the cost.  Oracle and PostgreSQL are both very extensible databases, bot PostgreSQL is arguably more extensible than Oracle is in some important ways.  There are also fewer surprises like transactions and DDL, NULLs etc. within core operations (but more surprises out on the edges!) so in terms of a no-surprises database, a move from Oracle is a shift from ideosyncracies in core functions to ideosyncracies in peripheral functions which is a very positive tradeoff.

> maybe it's NOSQL letting down one too many people.

Thats not what prevails IMHO. Or should I say "not yet". Yes, NOSQL is
on the cutting-edge now and lots of people **talk** about it. Few
implement it really (I didn't say "nobody", I have examples of great
usages of NOSQL where it is a real solution to a specific need).

Yep. 

Another big issue is we are seeing a significant rise in PostgreSQL vis a vis MySQL.  I think there are three fundamental reasons for that:

1)  MySQL's whole approach to data  is optimized for moderately engineered solutions which don't change much db-structure-wise and don't really expect multiple apps writing to the same relations.  The problem is that:

 * transactional ddl is a *killer* feature for agile environments, because it means iterations are a lot easier to handle when something goes wrong.  MySQL hasn't implemented it yet and they really need to in order to remain competitive, but if MySQL has this feature and Oracle doesn't?  Then what?

 * People get to a certain size and opening up the db to multiple writers becomes necessary, which means you have to be careful about sql_mode settings on each session.

 * Spacial is becoming big with all the hype regarding local and social networking.

 * People do business with Oracle only grudgingly.

So my bet here is that PostgreSQL arrives really on the right time
(marketting/sales would say the «time to market» is good).

Now our users will have the choice to NOT use another rdbms
(NOSQL=rdbms, really? :) to do some NOSQL, since PostgreSQL can, at
least, let them start some NOSQL-ish applications without installing
anything else.

This is important also.  And moreover it allows merging of data between a nosql-ish world and an RDBMS world. 

> Somebody wrote that a lot of new users were discovering postgres,
> looks like there's something to it.

This is the result of many great efforts from different people. It
wasn't easy and took long time to be achieved... Thanks to everybody
on this list for that:

1/ IMHO, all the PUGS, national or multinational PostgreSQL usergroups
do there a really GREAT job. I participated in lots of pgDays and
similar meetings, and talked with lots of newcomers. Those events
bring PostgreSQL under the light, where it has to be. I really hope
we'll continue having some "newbie" or "newcomer" tracks/talks in
those events, since quite a lot of people coming to those events don't
know even what PostgreSQL is capable of !

 +1.  I have heard this from a number of folks new to PostgreSQL. 

2/ Also, translators do a real great job. A RDBMS is really something
technicaly difficult to understand. If you add the language barrier to
it, it becomes completely unreachable for lots of users. So, with
translators doing such a great job translating "the" doc and doing so
much great articles, this lowers the difficulty, since the technical
problems are explained in the mother tongue of the newcomer.

Agreed here.
 
3/ Companies around PostgreSQL do a lot of professional communications
on the internet and magazines, etc.. Pro users have now a real good
offer, in many languages, places and also company sizes. From the
"unipersonal company" to the "multinational company", every pro user
can find the right company for its need. This is something quite new.
It wasn't like that like 10 years ago, and this started like what.. 5
years? That's nothing compared to the choice of a RDBMS in companies:
usually the choice of "the" RDBMS of a company is done for 20 years.
You just can't imagine how many customers come to us with a
20-years-old usage of Oracle or Informix or... etc... Our art there is
convince them that PostgreSQL is no revolution, what's good for Oracle
is also for PostgreSQL, for example (recycle knowledge :)

4/ not-only-mailing-list. This is an aspect too. What's not on the web
now doesn't exist I fear. Having the wiki up, the git... Thanks to the
PG admin guys, you rock... So many PostgreSQL.<my_country_extension>
websites helps a lot too (since this is directly linked to point 2/
too). There are so much blogs about PostgreSQL now, and of great
quality. We're also present in many other medias like Twitter and so
on. This are ways for the newcomers to come to our community. If you
don't see light thru the windows, you don't enter. So, more light
people ! :)


Sorry for being this long, I just wanted to know if those toughts
would be shared or not by you. So, hoping to read from you :D

Also in much of the world a big issue is that there is a perceived (and often actual!) lack of good qualified professionals on PostgreSQL.  In many areas our growth is entirely constrained by this. 

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Jean-Paul Argudo
Date:
Subject: Why new users come to PostgreSQL (IMHO)
Next
From: Rafael Martinez
Date:
Subject: Re: News coverage for 9.2 release