Re: Elocution - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

Don't forget Red Hat Database is PostgreSQL! I think that if Postgres would
get the same press that (undeservingly) MySQL gets, we'd be #1. And would be
used in the same sentence as Oracle and DB2.

I think we still could have IBM hawk Postgres to some degree. Maybe for a
light version of WebSphere. This would take some convincing to get them to
do, because it defers money to them, and it's likely that they'll never need
DB2. On the other hand WebShere is no easy mess to get out of.

There's an announcement at /. about Mono shipping ASP.Net. The list that
Izcaza gave for supported databases is: "Oracle, MS SQL, Sybase, ODBC,
OleDB, Gnome Data Access, SqLite, MySQL and of course, Postgres." Now I'm
all for saving the best for last, but I'd prefer Postgres to have been
first.

How do we accomplish that? We need to infiltrate high-visibility projects
and be vocal. MySQL is up there because people talked about it, and now a
lot of people use it.

Does anyone know if we can do a "mysql_dump | psql" or similar for migration
(at least for data)? (Are the syntax quirks compatible enough to make it
effortless?)

I feel that we must examine the reasons why MySQL got picked up and ran
with. I don't know other people's reasons, but here are mine:
1) I was learning PHP and MySQL was commonly talked about, and
well-supported
2) MySQL was fast, light and easy to set up. This was when Postgres had a
TOC for INSTALL (6.x).
3) While learning, I knew nothing about databases. Referential integrity
constraints?, triggers? Had I known what they are and how [important it is]
to use them I'd have not used MySQL.
4) MySQL ran under windows almost as easily as under Linux, as did Apache
and PHP. Now you can do it with PostgreSQL, but still, currently, it is no
where as easy.
5) Can't drop a column in Postgres (easily)
6) (though not a concern of mine at the time, it eventually became one)
Replication (MySQL has a binary stream that can be fed to another machine)

While much of the above is now dated, the people who looked into Postgres
probably have bad memories, and a descent investment in MySQL. New awareness
and easy migration are key to getting them back. I came back because I
learned how important ref. integ. constr. were, and how awesome triggers can
be.

Hope that helps
-J

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Ramsey [mailto:pramsey@refractions.net]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 7:03 PM
To: Jason Hihn; pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Elocution


Here's the thing: I agree 100% with everything you say, all of it. And
yet, right now in the area of operating systems, corporations are
retiring their tanks (proprietary UNIX) in favour of Hyundi (Linux).
What gives? Something has changed, and it is something we should look
very closely at.

My guess as to what as changed is that some of the tank-makers have
abandoned the field and are now marketing the Hyundi as a Humvee (to
further complicate the analogy).  IBM primarily, but also Dell, Compaq
and even Sun (!!?!?! Better Red than Dead, perhaps?) have given Linux
the stamp of corporate "acceptability" and that has been what put it
over the top.

So, who is going to be our IBM? I thought Red Hat might be it, but they
are too dependant on Oracle right now to risk offending them. IBM itself
already has two databases, it is hard to imagine them taking on another
one (of course, they already had a couple operating systems before
taking on Linux). HP/Compaq is a possibility. But really, it will take a
company with existing credibility and accounts to really push things
over the top.

Here's the bad news again though: In the Linux/Apache case, IBM took the
OSS product with the most groundswell momentum and surfed the wave. They
did not make the wave themselves, they just amplified it. In the db
sphere, the groundswell product is not pgsql unfortunately.

That's my thesis anyways. Thoughts?


Jason Hihn wrote:
> The answer is simple really. Fingers. When something goes wrong fingers
turn
> into blame compasses. At my two previous jobs and my current one, immunity
> of finger pointing was the #1 reason for sticking with something
expensive.
> This pointing applies in two directions: to managers and to vendors.
>
> If a manager keeps the tanks, and the M1A2 dies in the middle of a
> battlefield, they can say, "well we had an acceptable track record with
the
> M1A1, so it wasn't a crazy idea." Others will follow the reasoning
(assuming
> the M1A2 has similar design criteria and didn't end up a being a VW
beetle)
> Reason will prevail, and he will keep his job.

--
       __
      /
      | Paul Ramsey
      | Refractions Research
      | Email: pramsey@refractions.net
      | Phone: (250) 885-0632
      \_