Thread: Dropping postgres as a whole.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why
not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that Volkswagen
is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time)
referred to as VW.
Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG+9zMATb/zqfZUUQRAg+ZAKCNgntEJI/3PoO2HRbD+ZzRaP+CEwCcCBQ4
M0AC6Zy+j4twXe+hd/r5NIA=
=KpGa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Hello, > > I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why > not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that > Volkswagen > is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time) > referred to as VW. > > Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre > junk and > just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. > > Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself > included. +1 I like it. From a design standpoint, 'Pg' is nicer. I know we're not there yet, but just sayin'. -selena -- Selena Deckelmann Information Systems Manager Chris King Precision Components Made in Portland, Oregon www.chrisking.com / 503.972.4050 x230
On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
An issue with PG (or Pg) is that it is used for other things with about 170m Google hits.
One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25 company at pg.com and the PG stock symbol. Coincidentally, they are one of the big practitioners of brand management.
Would this be similar to naming a software project GM, a la General Motors?
--
John Wang
http://www.dev411.com/blog/
I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why
not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that Volkswagen
is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time)
referred to as VW.
Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.
An issue with PG (or Pg) is that it is used for other things with about 170m Google hits.
One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25 company at pg.com and the PG stock symbol. Coincidentally, they are one of the big practitioners of brand management.
Would this be similar to naming a software project GM, a la General Motors?
--
John Wang
http://www.dev411.com/blog/
On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and > just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. To you, it doesn't matter anyway. You're consistently saying you're fine with the, "also referred to as Postgres", just that you don't want to change it officially. Still, you're saying, "also referred to as PG" which means you still have no intent to officially do anything. Seems to me like you're trying to get everyone to forget the actual official name change topic and back onto the Postgres, PG, <insert your own favorite name here> discussion. > Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included. So do I, but not in conversation; it just sounds lame. I can't think of one sentence that sounds good with PG in place of Postgres. Frankly, I think PostgreSQL is better than "PG" in spoken conversation. Examples (which sounds better from a marketing perspective? PG is a geek acronym that ain't gonna fly in helping Postgres advocacy): After seeing what PG is capable of, our company decided to adopt it. After seeing what Postgres is capable of, our company decided to adopt it. After seeing what PostgreSQL is capable of, our company decided to adopt it. -- Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324 EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - --On Thursday, September 27, 2007 10:11:34 -0700 Selena Deckelmann <sdeckelmann@chrisking.com> wrote: > > On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why >> not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that >> Volkswagen >> is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time) >> referred to as VW. >> >> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre >> junk and >> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. >> >> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself >> included. > > +1 I like it. > > From a design standpoint, 'Pg' is nicer. I know we're not there yet, but > just sayin'. Just to clarify, I don't believe JD is advocating *changing the name* to Pg, only using Pg as the common name vs Postgres ... Right JD? :) - ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFG++Tf4QvfyHIvDvMRAsXMAJkBZgVaPVWBLm8iZUhEfFD5VWmpoACdEwXt YPJwZONqbz5JZS++zsjRyrM= =wIIv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself >>> included. >> +1 I like it. > >> From a design standpoint, 'Pg' is nicer. I know we're not there yet, but >> just sayin'. > > Just to clarify, I don't believe JD is advocating *changing the name* to Pg, > only using Pg as the common name vs Postgres ... > > Right JD? :) That is correct. I am *not* advocating changing our name to Pg. I am simply advocating the idea that we are PostgreSQL, also known as Pg. (the the Volkswagen metaphor) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > ---- > Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) > Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org > Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 - -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG+/AgATb/zqfZUUQRAsbFAKCuUWn/IJhMjNln2QMEvvShGOUsCQCfVUwZ RW03EpQGAtyowGxAo08BT4g= =JhK4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
John Wang wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why
>> not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that Volkswagen
>> is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time)
>> referred to as VW.
>>
>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
>>
>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.
>
>
> An issue with PG (or Pg) is that it is used for other things with about 170m
> Google hits.
>
> One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25
> company at pg.com and the PG stock symbol. Coincidentally, they are one of
> the big practitioners of brand management.
>
> Would this be similar to naming a software project GM, a la General Motors?
Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general.
Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor
are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...).
I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely
common.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG+/CaATb/zqfZUUQRAiptAJwLIfTxl2//0z+NnaeCJmrD/t0xLQCfWdwY
kxXxBxv0Ess02aEsPLD9yTE=
=CWLB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
>
> To you, it doesn't matter anyway. You're consistently saying you're
> fine with the, "also referred to as Postgres", just that you don't
> want to change it officially. Still, you're saying, "also referred to
> as PG" which means you still have no intent to officially do anything.
>
> Seems to me like you're trying to get everyone to forget the actual
> official name change topic and back onto the Postgres, PG, <insert
> your own favorite name here> discussion.
I am simply offering an alternative idea that may actually have some
merit and has shown to have at least some by the posts of one core
member and the leader of the PDXPUG.
I would also note that the "current" topic is not about changing
official name. The current topic, is about if we should intersperse
PostgreSQL and Postgres into the documentation.
>
>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.
>
> So do I, but not in conversation; it just sounds lame. I can't think
> of one sentence that sounds good with PG in place of Postgres.
I don't know that I agree. I could see, "Yeah I use pgsql, as a little
cumbersome, but Pg is short, simple and sweet".
> Frankly, I think PostgreSQL is better than "PG" in spoken
> conversation.
Of course it is. That is why the name should never officially change.
>
> Examples (which sounds better from a marketing perspective? PG is a
> geek acronym that ain't gonna fly in helping Postgres advocacy):
>
> After seeing what PG is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.
> After seeing what Postgres is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.
> After seeing what PostgreSQL is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.
+1 on the third one.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG+/F0ATb/zqfZUUQRAj5gAJ0U0HWVSUGgRtILPCud0bilRoJ18ACeJDdB
DidV1/yrRgn+mdbYaEN2s3o=
=obhX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sep 27, 2007, at 10:14 AM, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > - --On Thursday, September 27, 2007 10:11:34 -0700 Selena Deckelmann > <sdeckelmann@chrisking.com> wrote: > >> >> On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he >>> said, why >>> not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that >>> Volkswagen >>> is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time) >>> referred to as VW. >>> >>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre >>> junk and >>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. >>> >>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself >>> included. >> >> +1 I like it. >> >> From a design standpoint, 'Pg' is nicer. I know we're not there >> yet, but >> just sayin'. > > Just to clarify, I don't believe JD is advocating *changing the > name* to Pg, > only using Pg as the common name vs Postgres ... > > Right JD? :) And I didn't mean to imply a whole name change. Only that 'Pg' is easier on the eyes than 'PG'. -selena -- Selena Deckelmann Information Systems Manager Chris King Precision Components Made in Portland, Oregon www.chrisking.com / 503.972.4050 x230
Joshua D. Drake escribió: > Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general. > Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor > are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...). > > I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely > common. I think we're trying to find a name for saying out aloud. Both "pg" and "pgsql" are mostly used in writing. I respect the idea of not renaming PostgreSQL to Postgres immediately, just like I support the idea of eventually doing it. However, the idea of dropping Postgres as a name/alias altogether seems blind and dumb. Blind, because it ignores the fact that many people already use that name. Dumb, because there is a lot of support (granted, not consensus) for actually using it as the official name. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ Postgres Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake escribió:
>
>> Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general.
>> Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor
>> are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...).
>>
>> I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely
>> common.
>
> I think we're trying to find a name for saying out aloud. Both "pg" and
> "pgsql" are mostly used in writing.
>
> I respect the idea of not renaming PostgreSQL to Postgres immediately,
> just like I support the idea of eventually doing it. However, the idea
> of dropping Postgres as a name/alias altogether seems blind and dumb.
> Blind, because it ignores the fact that many people already use that
> name. Dumb, because there is a lot of support (granted, not consensus)
> for actually using it as the official name.
>
Fair enough... I would note that I use the term Pg while speaking all
the time. I commonly refer to it as Pg when dealing with pretty much all
of our customers.
I would also note that we are talking about writing :) because this
thread is an offshoot of the question if we should intersperse the
PostgreSQL and Postgres names in the docs. Thus, my idea that we say
PostgreSQL, once in the docs (excluding title) to state:
PostgreSQL, further referred to as Pg (or whatever) and throughout the
docs "All" references to PostgreSQL would say Pg (or Pgsql).
The reason I brought up Pg as a whole is:
1. It is short and sweet
2. It is very commonly used including in these like applications and
drivers.. You don't see DBD::PostgreSQL it is DBD::Pg similarly you
don't see PHPPostgreSQLAdmin, it is PHPPgAdmin (did I case that right?).
3. It shows that there is certainly more than one alternative (versus
just Postgres) should we decide to do this.
4. It is short and sweet :)
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG+/VvATb/zqfZUUQRAuDNAKCtNy8gYYfQrZA1lfGmXKd/zUa72ACfUv55
93CzUm8yBWrFzxreMN5TXqw=
=kS8x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2007-09-27_14:24:47-0400 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>: > The reason I brought up Pg as a whole is: > > 1. It is short and sweet I think that's a problem. I think Pg might be good name for a variable in some code, but not in written documentation. My primary concern is the search engines. Google is going to be the first place many, many people go to look for information. Both 'PostgreSQL' and 'Postgres' unambiguously refer to a specific thing. For better or worse, search engines have a huge impact on product visibility, and even usability. Try searching for information on 'screen' for example. I do think it's fair to compare the merits of choosing a name based on its written impact vs. how it's spoken though. I wonder what the record is for the longest running listserv thread. -- Ron Peterson https://www.yellowbank.com/
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and > just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. "PS" be a better abbreviation based on the spelling "PostgreSQL". And "PGQL" be better based on the pronunciation "Post Gres Q L". Don't you think?
I think PGSQL enforces the PostgreSQL name, where as PG can still lead to Postgre.
I do refer to it as PGSQL, Postgres and PostgreSQL in conversation, but this has gotten to the point of silliness. We don't need to adopt more usable forms of the name. We need to settle on a name that makes sense and move forward. The politics around this and the vocal anti-rename minority are getting ridiculous, imho.
On 9/27/07, Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com> wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
"PS" be a better abbreviation based on the spelling "PostgreSQL". And
"PGQL" be better based on the pronunciation "Post Gres Q L". Don't you think?
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Hello, Am 27.09.2007 um 21:52 schrieb Ron Mayer: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre >> junk and >> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. > > "PS" be a better abbreviation based on the spelling "PostgreSQL". Sorry, but PS stands for PostScript in the IT area and for Horsepower in Germany. And there are probably many more meanings in other languages too. You cannot create a new two letter acronym today any more and all the less if you want it to bused worldwide. There are only 26 by 26 = 676 possible combinations and most of them are certainly used up already. The VW abbrevation is also a logo not only two letters and are recognized as a sign. I am not sure whether this was actually your intention, but turning from PG to PS actually shows how unusable this direction is. Lets stick with Postgres which everybody seems to be fine with as a shorthand and dont stir up the documentation with altering between both forms. Bye, Christian
JD, > Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and > just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their attorneys. ;-) I vote for "UltimateDB". --Josh
Josh Berkus wrote: > JD, > >> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and >> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. > > > I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of > America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their attorneys. > > ;-) > > I vote for "UltimateDB". > Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres". Brian
Ron Peterson wrote: > 2007-09-27_14:24:47-0400 "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>: > > > The reason I brought up Pg as a whole is: > > > > 1. It is short and sweet > > I think that's a problem. I think Pg might be good name for a variable > in some code, but not in written documentation. My primary concern is > the search engines. Google is going to be the first place many, many > people go to look for information. Both 'PostgreSQL' and 'Postgres' > unambiguously refer to a specific thing. For better or worse, search > engines have a huge impact on product visibility, and even usability. > Try searching for information on 'screen' for example. > > I do think it's fair to compare the merits of choosing a name based on > its written impact vs. how it's spoken though. > > I wonder what the record is for the longest running listserv thread. The problem is it isn't. ;-) -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
LOL thank you for a good laugh.
On 9/28/07, Brian Hurt <bhurt@janestcapital.com> wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
> JD,
>
>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
>
>
> I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of
> America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their attorneys.
>
> ;-)
>
> I vote for "UltimateDB".
>
Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres".
Brian
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: > > >JD, > > > >>Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre > >>junk and just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. > > > > > >I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of > >America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their > >attorneys. > > > >;-) > > > >I vote for "UltimateDB". > > > > Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres". +1 ;) Cheers, D -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote! Consider donating to PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
On Friday 28 September 2007 11:28, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote:
> > Josh Berkus wrote:
> > >JD,
> > >
> > >>Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre
> > >>junk and just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
> > >
> > >I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of
> > >America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their
> > >attorneys.
> > >
> > >;-)
> > >
> > >I vote for "UltimateDB".
> >
> > Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres".
>
> +1 ;)
>
Sorry, I have to disagree. I don't think it is clear what the Digres project
would be. Now if you went with DigreSQL, then I'm on board.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Josh Berkus wrote:
> JD,
>
>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.
>
> I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of America.
> And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their attorneys.
>
> ;-)
Umpf, fair enough :)
>
> I vote for "UltimateDB".
I am not sure if you are kidding, but if we are going to change the
name, why the heck not :). At least then the name is specific to our
culture and technology.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> --Josh
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG/SZlATb/zqfZUUQRAspkAJ92Fr7i+sVY8nwadR/cc9xiR/95lwCbBaq7
ythzmIW1EsuEWBjfQdvfWM0=
=tA/n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote:
> Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres".
Except then it'll regularly get misspelled as Digress. And
pronounced Dee'-gray.
I think we should call it Gerwuffle. Like, "Yeah, go install that
Gerwuffle over there, and twiddle the thingy, and you'll be set to
go."
Or, of course, we can do what certain other parties with previous
renaming problems did. We can be The Database Formerly Known as
Postgres. Then when someone complains about confusion with the
PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become The Database.
That oughta clear up any confusion, eh?
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.
--Roger Brinner
Why stop there?
------------------
DATABASE
------------------
I can see it now... "I use Database and it Rocks!" "Which one?" "Database"
On 9/28/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote:
> Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres".
Except then it'll regularly get misspelled as Digress. And
pronounced Dee'-gray.
I think we should call it Gerwuffle. Like, "Yeah, go install that
Gerwuffle over there, and twiddle the thingy, and you'll be set to
go."
Or, of course, we can do what certain other parties with previous
renaming problems did. We can be The Database Formerly Known as
Postgres. Then when someone complains about confusion with the
PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become The Database.
That oughta clear up any confusion, eh?
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.
--Roger Brinner
---------------------------(end of broadcast)-------------------- -------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
On 9/28/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote: > We can be The Database Formerly Known as Postgres. > Then when someone complains about confusion with the > PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become > The Database. +1 :) -- Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324 EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/
Andrew, > Or, of course, we can do what certain other parties with previous > renaming problems did. We can be The Database Formerly Known as > Postgres. Then when someone complains about confusion with the > PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become The Database. > That oughta clear up any confusion, eh? Further, it would lead to the acronym "TDFKAP". Which would clear up our pronunciation problems right there. ;-) --Josh
On Friday 28 September 2007 13:18, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote:
> > Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres".
>
> Except then it'll regularly get misspelled as Digress. And
> pronounced Dee'-gray.
>
> I think we should call it Gerwuffle. Like, "Yeah, go install that
> Gerwuffle over there, and twiddle the thingy, and you'll be set to
> go."
>
> Or, of course, we can do what certain other parties with previous
> renaming problems did. We can be The Database Formerly Known as
> Postgres. Then when someone complains about confusion with the
> PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become The Database.
> That oughta clear up any confusion, eh?
>
Then CMD could be "The" The Database Company.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat wrote: > On Friday 28 September 2007 13:18, Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote: >>> Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres". >> Except then it'll regularly get misspelled as Digress. And >> pronounced Dee'-gray. >> >> I think we should call it Gerwuffle. Like, "Yeah, go install that >> Gerwuffle over there, and twiddle the thingy, and you'll be set to >> go." >> >> Or, of course, we can do what certain other parties with previous >> renaming problems did. We can be The Database Formerly Known as >> Postgres. Then when someone complains about confusion with the >> PostQUEL-using version of the code, we can just become The Database. >> That oughta clear up any confusion, eh? >> > > Then CMD could be "The" The Database Company. > Sold! Joshua D. Drake
On 9/27/2007 2:13 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joshua D. Drake escribió: > >> Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general. >> Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor >> are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...). >> >> I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely >> common. > > I think we're trying to find a name for saying out aloud. Both "pg" and > "pgsql" are mostly used in writing. blah blah ... PostgreSQL (pronounced Postgres-Q-L), also known as pgsql (pronounced Pigsqueal) ... Jan (pronounced Yann) occasionally referred to as a European bloke (pronounce that with *ouch* at the end to spare me the effort) -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
On 9/28/2007 11:56 AM, Robert Treat wrote: > On Friday 28 September 2007 11:28, David Fetter wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 10:13:47AM -0400, Brian Hurt wrote: >> > Josh Berkus wrote: >> > >JD, >> > > >> > >>Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre >> > >>junk and just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG. >> > > >> > >I think PG is trademarked by the Motion Picture Association of >> > >America. And you *know* you don't want to tangle with their >> > >attorneys. >> > > >> > >;-) >> > > >> > >I vote for "UltimateDB". >> > >> > Given the length of this thread, I vote for "Digres". >> >> +1 ;) >> > > Sorry, I have to disagree. I don't think it is clear what the Digres project > would be. Now if you went with DigreSQL, then I'm on board. And it takes how long until we see "Digre"? I think we cannot use anything that ends with an s. What about Postgrep? It says something about searching for rows even without DB or SQL, and for people coming from the most popular open source database, SQL is a necessary inconvenience to search over flat files in a concurrent environment anyway. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #