Thread: FAQ or so?
Hi folks,
maybe is this a so long debated subject.. But maybe is it a good
starting point to refresh all the demonstrations points of PostgreSQL
advocacy or PostgreSQL-vs-xx arguments. It may be usefull for me (and I
believe other people here) to be able to argue on various points just
like the eternal « what about the responsabilities issues ? » or « who
will be responsible for xxx ? » (that's my discussion today, but it can
be another-day/thread for other points).
While discussing with other IT-people in different country (US, CA,
FR), the responsability issue is always put on the top of the problems
of IT-directors each time you talk about PostgreSQL migration. This kind
of problem is now more sensible than in the past because, from my point
of view, there is lesser technical problem to migrate to PG now (I mean
there's plenty of (very good) technical reasons to migrate from an
another proprietary/opensource database management system).
The problem is more on the policy side (or «politics» as we use to
say in France), and I would like to have some others arguments than,
just contact a service co. to get some support/responsibility for
PostgreSQL. Any answer I get back from this arguments is that there's
_no_ real editor to put the blame (i.e. get money back) on. I'm not
quite experienced on this field, but I heard a lot of people here in
France saying that End User License tells users that the editor is not
responsible of malfunctions or deasaster liable to the software they are
using. I can argue this, but people still believe that accepting such
licences give them the ability to lead the editor to the court.
More generaly, this is an OpenSource question. But PostgreSQL case
is more sensible from my point of view because, large scale migration is
about to be done in France (on the country administration side btw) and
no direction or no project manager wants to handle (or endorse) the
responsability of PostgreSQL migration or choice (whereas they could
handle it technically).
My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
regarding to PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?
I hope it won't be an off topic discussion (well, I would'nt post
this message to -hackers ;) ). Moreover, please "pardon my French".
Thanks a lot for any answer :)
--
Jean-Christophe
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:32:18 +0100, Jean-Christophe Arnu <jx@tuxfarm.org> wrote: > > My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others > arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue > regarding to PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ? A very good exercise would be to search for proof that someone successfully took Oracle/Microsoft/IBM to court for losing critical data in their database. I'll wager that you won't find anything. And on top of that, the only thing you might get back from the vendor is the licensing costs for the software - which were FREE for PostgreSQL anyway! Don't forget to factor in the effort that it takes to get your money back from one of these vendors (a tremendous effort and colossal loss of time)... Then ask about support. Are you REALLY going to get top notch support from your vendor? Compare that support to what you have available in the PostgreSQL community. Sure, you can pay someone for commercial support if you want, but it certainly isn't mandatory like most proprietary database systems would require. And most find the community much more helpful and responsive than paid vendors, although YMMV. If this really boils down to risk management, then a commercial, proprietary database actually incurs more risk - you have to pay for the software in advance, you have to pay for support in advance, there is little-to-no proof that you would be successful at recovering damages in the event of a disaster. In the end you have the same likelihood of recovering damages from PostgreSQL as you have with the big boys (in other words, forget it); and you have no financial risk up front as the software and support is free. There's my take on the subject, -- Mitch
Mitch Pirtle m'expliquait (le 23.02.2005 16:24):
>On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 09:32:18 +0100, Jean-Christophe Arnu <jx@tuxfarm.org> wrote:
>
>
>> My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others
>>arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue
>>regarding to PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ?
>>
>>
>
>A very good exercise would be to search for proof that someone
>successfully took Oracle/Microsoft/IBM to court for losing critical
>data in their database.
>
Well, first of all, thank you for all your replies, I thought my
questions were not so interesting and I discover that people here have
lot of saying on this :). Thanks for your help.
When I expose this kind of arguments (as I did actually for some of
my «wanna-have-responsible» people) notabely about the responsabilities,
they reply that having a responsible is just what they need. Not for
putting problems to court or asking why this happened (even they do ask
for it), but to have a company name whereas if they take the
responsability of choosing a specific Open Source DB Solution they
(personnaly) are responsible for it. I think it's also a "psychological"
problem. People doesn't want (cowardness regarding to their carreer in
public or private area) to take the risk of making choices that could
make them appear as only responsible as person. A better choice is a
choice where these people are only a node not a leaf (tree view) so that
they can tell that they were confident in xxx editor's
commercial/technical "maked-up front-end". I believe there's educational
actions the community can take or build to help them to make the step.
As a precise exemple, I had a not so short discussion with
technician from my government who were ready to use and promote
PostgreSQL use in some critical applications (flooding prevention,
that's my business field). The problem where upper in their hierarchy. I
felt that they had problems with defending PostgreSQL choice against
more commercialy-shinning-bright solutions (Oracle, not to mention it).
And the problem for the head of their staff is (well the support, but
the arguments you gave me may be a solution), in case of problem, how
would I be able to justify their choice if the database system is
involved. Be sure even a government would not put Oracle to court (they
have no time, money for this and doesn't aim to), they only want excuses
I think. I might be wrong but I don't see how it could be anything else !
As a matter of fact, I would like to propose ready-to-use solutions
to these people/technicians to help advocate PG to their hierarchy....
If I could, I would explain this directely to the guys who are
controlling decision processes... but I'm not introduced there.
Once again, thank you for your replies. :) (and once again, sorry if
I'm not as clear as I would/had to)
--
Jean-Christophe Arnu
PostgreSQLFr - Secretary
French community
Jean-Christophe Arnu wrote: > I think it's also a "psychological" > problem. This is the heart of the matter. Actually addressing the issue of "someone to sue" is probably irrelevant. Finding what it is that drives their fear is the important thing. Then, you either need to neutralise that fear or reverse it (so they fear NOT switching). This sort of stuff is routine with sales-people, harder for most technical types. > People doesn't want (cowardness regarding to their carreer in > public or private area) to take the risk of making choices that could > make them appear as only responsible as person. Fear of failure is usually stronger than desire for success. Also, don't forget they or their colleagues might have put a lot of effort/reputation into installing Oracle/MSSQL in the first place. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
One very small piece of fodder is the flyer I wrote regarding the Open Source Maturity Model and PostgreSQL. It highlights the stability of the project. http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/Tidbits/pgosmm1.pdf --elein On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 09:32:18AM +0100, Jean-Christophe Arnu wrote: > Hi folks, > > maybe is this a so long debated subject.. But maybe is it a good > starting point to refresh all the demonstrations points of PostgreSQL > advocacy or PostgreSQL-vs-xx arguments. It may be usefull for me (and I > believe other people here) to be able to argue on various points just > like the eternal ? what about the responsabilities issues ? ? or ? who > will be responsible for xxx ? ? (that's my discussion today, but it can > be another-day/thread for other points). > > While discussing with other IT-people in different country (US, CA, > FR), the responsability issue is always put on the top of the problems > of IT-directors each time you talk about PostgreSQL migration. This kind > of problem is now more sensible than in the past because, from my point > of view, there is lesser technical problem to migrate to PG now (I mean > there's plenty of (very good) technical reasons to migrate from an > another proprietary/opensource database management system). > > The problem is more on the policy side (or ?politics? as we use to > say in France), and I would like to have some others arguments than, > just contact a service co. to get some support/responsibility for > PostgreSQL. Any answer I get back from this arguments is that there's > _no_ real editor to put the blame (i.e. get money back) on. I'm not > quite experienced on this field, but I heard a lot of people here in > France saying that End User License tells users that the editor is not > responsible of malfunctions or deasaster liable to the software they are > using. I can argue this, but people still believe that accepting such > licences give them the ability to lead the editor to the court. > > More generaly, this is an OpenSource question. But PostgreSQL case > is more sensible from my point of view because, large scale migration is > about to be done in France (on the country administration side btw) and > no direction or no project manager wants to handle (or endorse) the > responsability of PostgreSQL migration or choice (whereas they could > handle it technically). > > My question is, how can I refine my arguments, do you have others > arguments I can use? What could we say about responsabilities issue > regarding to PG? How can I better advocate on PG -more generally- ? > > I hope it won't be an off topic discussion (well, I would'nt post > this message to -hackers ;) ). Moreover, please "pardon my French". > > Thanks a lot for any answer :) > > -- > Jean-Christophe > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) >
Along the lines of advocacy, I just posted the below paragraph to the
General mailing list - in my opinion this bug is in the list of
hinderences to adoption of postgres (I know from experience) - it
pertains to a standards compliance issue that's definitely used as an
excuse to not use pg vs the commercial dbs... it would help if someone
could make fixing this be a higher priority by raising awareness, or
something.
#####
"More specifically, I'd like to disable the non-standard backslash
escaping behavior of the server, so that backslashes aren't discarded,
like:
insert into table values ('This won''t work when inserting a \
character'); -> 'This won't work when inserting a character'
Instead I'd like for only single quotes (apostrophes) to server as the
escape character (for themselves), as in the iso/ansi recommendations
-so that the server behaves the same as Oracle, ms, and most other
databases in this regard.
I am living testament to all the users who switched from the 'big'
databases to pg and had the unpleasant surprise of having lost all the
backslashes chars -as well as having to tweak apps to get them to work.
If nothing else, a VERY prominently placed warning on the docs front
page should warn new users of the nonstandard behavior, imo. This can be
a life saver. "
ken
elein m'expliquait (le 02/23/05 19:19): >One very small piece of fodder is the flyer I wrote >regarding the Open Source Maturity Model and PostgreSQL. >It highlights the stability of the project. > >http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/Tidbits/pgosmm1.pdf > > > Awesome document (for me). Will give me more arguments :) Thanks a lot Elein! -- Jean-Christophe
> This is the heart of the matter. Actually addressing the issue of > "someone to sue" is probably irrelevant. Finding what it is that > drives their fear is the important thing. Then, you either need to > neutralise that fear or reverse it (so they fear NOT switching). This > sort of stuff is routine with sales-people, harder for most technical > types. > > > People doesn't want (cowardness regarding to their carreer in >> public or private area) to take the risk of making choices that could >> make them appear as only responsible as person. > > Fear of failure is usually stronger than desire for success. Also, > don't forget they or their colleagues might have put a lot of > effort/reputation into installing Oracle/MSSQL in the first place. <rant> Yep, that's a sickness that started to develop strongly in the 90's. With the markets being much more tense and companies being punished in the stock exchange not for losing money, but just for making less of it, the managers started not wanting to take decisions anymore. They called in more and more consultants so that they could point their finger at them in case of failure. I was a consultant for a couple of years and hated it all along. It was very far away from my personal ethics. </rant> Sorry for the rant, but I fully agree: it's most probably a psychological problem. Using a big name database seems so much reassuring... Cheers --------------- Francois Home page: http://www.monpetitcoin.com/ "If it's not from me, it's from Confucius" - Lao Tse
Ken, > Along the lines of advocacy, I just posted the below paragraph to the > General mailing list - in my opinion this bug is in the list of > hinderences to adoption of postgres (I know from experience) - it > pertains to a standards compliance issue that's definitely used as an > excuse to not use pg vs the commercial dbs... it would help if someone > could make fixing this be a higher priority by raising awareness, or > something. I understand that this is your pet peeve, but what you just did is called "hijacking a thread". -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco