Thread: recent Gartner's publication
I don't like this about EDB:
Community leadership: EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON support ....
Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, Teodor Sigaev, Andrew Dunstan, Alexander Korotkov, Peter Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ?
Regards,
Oleg
It looks like Gartner took the easy way out and excluded open source databases entirely. Unless the is a company backing the "product", i.e. someone to fill out their RFI, they couldn't be bothered to do full research on the state of popular DBMS's. I absolutely think the record should be set straight on who and how features are developed for PostgreSQL. Laziness is not an excuse for incorrect attribution. Regards, Bob Lunney Sent from my PDP11 On Oct 14, 2015, at 2:39 PM, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> wrote: I don't like this about EDB: *Community leadership: *EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON support .... Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, Teodor Sigaev <https://www.facebook.com/teodor.sigaev>, Andrew Dunstan <https://www.facebook.com/andrew.m.dunstan>, Alexander Korotkov <https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000478132817>, Peter Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ? http://www.gartner.com/technology/reprints.do?id=1-2PMFPEN&ct=151013&st=sb Regards, Oleg
On 10/14/2015 11:38 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > I don't like this about EDB: > > *Community leadership: *EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the > Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON > support .... > > Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, > Teodor Sigaev <https://www.facebook.com/teodor.sigaev>, Andrew Dunstan > <https://www.facebook.com/andrew.m.dunstan>, Alexander Korotkov > <https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000478132817>, Peter > Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ? > > > http://www.gartner.com/technology/reprints.do?id=1-2PMFPEN&ct=151013&st=sb JSON was primarily developed by Robert Haas. Gartner reports are generally sponsored so I doubt we could get them to change their marketing material anyway. JD > > Regards, > Oleg -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.
On 10/14/2015 02:44 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 10/14/2015 11:38 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: >> I don't like this about EDB: >> >> *Community leadership: *EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the >> Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON >> support .... >> >> Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, >> Teodor Sigaev <https://www.facebook.com/teodor.sigaev>, Andrew Dunstan >> <https://www.facebook.com/andrew.m.dunstan>, Alexander Korotkov >> <https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000478132817>, Peter >> Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? If so, should we ask Gartner to correct >> this ? >> >> >> http://www.gartner.com/technology/reprints.do?id=1-2PMFPEN&ct=151013&st=sb >> > > JSON was primarily developed by Robert Haas. Except for et al(AD,TL,...) : http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blame;f=src/backend/utils/adt/json.c;h=f394942bc359b73068c2bf3a2a514758ecf5c957;hb=HEAD > > Gartner reports are generally sponsored so I doubt we could get them to > change their marketing material anyway. > > JD > >> >> Regards, >> Oleg > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
It looks like Gartner took the easy way out and excluded open source databases entirely. Unless the is a company backing the "product", i.e. someone to fill out their RFI, they couldn't be bothered to do full research on the state of popular DBMS's.
I absolutely think the record should be set straight on who and how features are developed for PostgreSQL. Laziness is not an excuse for incorrect attribution.
Regards,
Bob Lunney
Sent from my PDP11
Sent from my PDP11
I don't like this about EDB:Community leadership: EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON support ....Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, Teodor Sigaev, Andrew Dunstan, Alexander Korotkov, Peter Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ?Regards,Oleg
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't like this about EDB: > > Community leadership: EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the > Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON support > .... > > Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, Teodor > Sigaev, Andrew Dunstan, Alexander Korotkov, Peter Geoghegan) work on jsonb ? > If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ? Of course not. As JD points out, it refers to me having developed the original version of the JSON parser. At some point (a long time ago), I was asked about what EnterpriseDB employees have contributed to the community, and that's one of the things I mentioned. It's not the only thing I mentioned, and it's not in my opinion the most important thing I've done in the last 5 years, but that's what they picked. Lots of other people have done great work in that area since then, far exceeding my original contribution. I can take credit only for getting it off the ground. The bit about "partitioning" seems like an outright mistake. I'm almost sure that's referring to one of EDB's proprietary features, not anything community-related. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 10/14/2015 02:54 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 10/14/2015 02:44 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> JSON was primarily developed by Robert Haas. > > Except for et al(AD,TL,...) : The release notes state Robert Haas. If that isn't accurate, shrug. JD -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.
On Oct 15, 2015 04:40, "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't like this about EDB:
> >
> > Community leadership: EnterpriseDB is the primary contributor to the
> > Postgres community, and responsible for recent features such as JSON support
> > ....
> >
> > Am I right and "recent features such as JSON support" means our (me, Teodor
> > Sigaev, Andrew Dunstan, Alexander Korotkov, Peter Geoghegan) work on jsonb ?
> > If so, should we ask Gartner to correct this ?
>
> Of course not. As JD points out, it refers to me having developed the
> original version of the JSON parser. At some point (a long time ago),
> I was asked about what EnterpriseDB employees have contributed to the
> community, and that's one of the things I mentioned. It's not the
> only thing I mentioned, and it's not in my opinion the most important
> thing I've done in the last 5 years, but that's what they picked.
> Lots of other people have done great work in that area since then, far
> exceeding my original contribution. I can take credit only for
> getting it off the ground.
Well, if "recent" here is not 9.4, then you're right. Still looks slyish, though.
>
> The bit about "partitioning" seems like an outright mistake. I'm
> almost sure that's referring to one of EDB's proprietary features, not
> anything community-related.
Yes, "recent" here is very funny.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 10/14/2015 06:48 PM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > Well, if "recent" here is not 9.4, then you're right. Still looks > slyish, though. Keep in mind that a gartner report is two things: 1. Marketing 2. Marketing They aren't going to try and explain the difference between JSON or JSONB. Heck, nobody is, people are interested in "JSON" not the technical improvement "JSONB". So in terms of recent, 9.2 with JSON support makes sense. It is also still the "buzzword" that everyone is looking for. jD -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.
All, If Gartner gets even half the information correct, I feel pretty good about it. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
On 10/14/2015 08:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > All, > > If Gartner gets even half the information correct, I feel pretty good > about it. +1 -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:38:06PM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote: > On 10/14/2015 08:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > >All, > > > >If Gartner gets even half the information correct, I feel pretty good > >about it. > > +1 Kevin Grittner saw Oleg's original post and started a discussion inside EDB. Although some EDB staff read the report before, no one realized its inaccuracies or possible misinterpretations. EDB will work with Gartner to try to get the current report, or next year's report, improved. They are not certain of success, but they will try. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription +
Hi guys,
Do you think it could be possible/worth for the Community to take a step forward in order to have "PostgreSQL" in Gartner's magic quadrant?
Ciao,
Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia - Managing Director
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele.bartolini@2ndQuadrant.it | www.2ndQuadrant.it
Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia - Managing Director
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
gabriele.bartolini@2ndQuadrant.it | www.2ndQuadrant.it
2015-10-15 22:59 GMT+02:00 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:38:06PM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote:
> On 10/14/2015 08:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >If Gartner gets even half the information correct, I feel pretty good
> >about it.
>
> +1
Kevin Grittner saw Oleg's original post and started a discussion inside
EDB. Although some EDB staff read the report before, no one realized
its inaccuracies or possible misinterpretations. EDB will work with
Gartner to try to get the current report, or next year's report,
improved. They are not certain of success, but they will try.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Roman grave inscription +
--
Sent via pgsql-advocacy mailing list (pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-advocacy
16 octobre 2015 09:42 "Gabriele Bartolini" <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it> a écrit: > Hi guys, > > Do you think it could be possible/worth for the Community to take a step forward in order to have > "PostgreSQL" in Gartner's magic quadrant? > Is it worth it ? As far as I can tell in France this thing as no impact at all. There are some journalists that may talk about it from timeto time, but otherwise I've never seen anyone making a reference to that ranking and I'm pretty sure it has no effecton the people here. Maybe it's different in other countries though...
On 10/16/2015 07:17 AM, damien@dalibo.info wrote: > 16 octobre 2015 09:42 "Gabriele Bartolini" <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it> a écrit: >> Hi guys, >> >> Do you think it could be possible/worth for the Community to take a step forward in order to have >> "PostgreSQL" in Gartner's magic quadrant? >> > > Is it worth it ? > > As far as I can tell in France this thing as no impact at all. There are some journalists that may talk about it from timeto time, but otherwise I've never seen anyone making a reference to that ranking and I'm pretty sure it has no effecton the people here. Maybe it's different in other countries though... It isn't worth it. Leave the sticky business to the kids with the VC funded candy. JD > > -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am 16.10.2015 um 16:17 schrieb damien@dalibo.info: > 16 octobre 2015 09:42 "Gabriele Bartolini" > <gabriele.bartolini@2ndquadrant.it> a écrit: >> Hi guys, >> >> Do you think it could be possible/worth for the Community to take >> a step forward in order to have "PostgreSQL" in Gartner's magic >> quadrant? >> > > Is it worth it ? > > As far as I can tell in France this thing as no impact at all. > There are some journalists that may talk about it from time to > time, but otherwise I've never seen anyone making a reference to > that ranking and I'm pretty sure it has no effect on the people > here. Maybe it's different in other countries though... Uhm, well, I sent a link to an online article (by some EDB staff) mentioning this very Gartner study to one of my managers the other day, and both are now circling in the upper management, AFAIK. As much as I don't like what Gartner do (esp. in this case), large companies' managements seem to adore them, and it _can_ have impact. As a sidenote: it is pretty typical that Gartner rather features an american, VC-backed (correct me if I'm wrong) company instead of a community as a whole... afterall, part of Gartner's customers are _also_ looking for investment opportunities, or they seek to get "support straight from the source". "... is the major contributor to XYZ" or "... is the company behind the popular open source product XYZ". That's wording those people know from the past & present (MySQL AB, Hortonworks, Datastax, <endless list here>,...), so they _think_ they understand the "business model" of Postgres. And I can't really blame EDB that they've not set that straight right away. It would probably be very tedious to explain it to Gartner in the first place, it's absolutely not too far away from the truth (are there any reasonable statistics?!?), it's more or less only marketing, and it certainly is a very good marketing instrument for _approaching_ potential PAS customers (i.e., those with loads of Oracle and a somewhat larger management structure). Just my 2(€)c. - -- Gunnar "Nick" Bluth RHCE/SCLA Mobil +49 172 8853339 Email: gunnar.bluth@pro-open.de _____________________________________________________________ In 1984 mainstream users were choosing VMS over UNIX. Ten years later they are choosing Windows over UNIX. What part of that message aren't you getting? - Tom Payne -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWIRBlAAoJEBAQrmsyiTOM7bYH/Rs4G1+8edmYiZnFDlsiic81 We2SSSBQLAPQd2+6DRtZfqAPXkPYitg3JbMDIIpf145W4NlJDSTcGhVMgIpN4wtc UOylSQuJFcjR4oIxyZzcuVG/2mVl745JmwPZltKvlS2qKAc6Ib8xqmb0teRWZh5L g8zjDQUFIJhqDPIEzNbTjtPxXCc9RyrnXkY23TCC71n6/4w7GsmANs4EVPBVVkGf ajwWjnCUXQ5V5J1pJKpvbyprYt7lxQyymiyz1T3A735f3v3YatA0int3kv0TpmGO a6Lu99I9yW+mgwjfSBDZLl+sneRRuv+rt7fufvX/+CTwn+NDrlSpX7pkbbbuWSM= =4YXx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Attachment
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 09:42:06AM +0200, Gabriele Bartolini wrote: > Hi guys, > > Do you think it could be possible/worth for the Community to take a step > forward in order to have "PostgreSQL" in Gartner's magic quadrant? Yes, I wanted to address that, but not in my "corrections" email. I think there are a few factors. Here is a list: * I am glad the inaccuracies were inside the EnterpriseDB section, and not at the top of the article, where they usually are. * There is some text that explains that their ranking evaluates all the products of a company as a whole, meaning they probably don't even think of Postgres as an offering that is separate from EnterpriseDB --- they are just not set up to evaluate things in that way. * I think they are used to studying open source/commercial hybrids in the MySQL/MongoDB/Ingres model, where the company controls the development. They do understand our setup based on their comments, but they are seeing it as a modified MySQL/MongoDB/Ingres model, not as a totally new one, more similar to RedHat. * They are not used to open source offerings as being a stand-alone useful product, e.g. Linux is a kernel, not a deployable solution --- you need a packager like Debian or RedHat. In fact, EDB is like RedHat in that they contribute to an open source project with many other companies as peers, but they are different in that the open source project itself is a deployable option, which the Linux kernel is not. This subtlety is often not well understood. * Gartner focuses on whole-solution offerings, e.g training, support, which the community does not have as a commercial offering. We have free support, but no SLA, for example. * In my opinion, they are focused on money-making enterprises, which the community is not. In summary, I would love to see a Postgres category on there, and would love to see Postgres as a pin on that chart, but it seems like a difficult goal unless their approach to open source dramatically changes. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Roman grave inscription +
On 10/16/2015 08:05 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > * In my opinion, they are focused on money-making enterprises, which > the community is not. > > In summary, I would love to see a Postgres category on there, and would > love to see Postgres as a pin on that chart, but it seems like a > difficult goal unless their approach to open source dramatically > changes. If I remember correctly from years past when I paid any attention whatsoever to Gartner, they primarily (only?) analyze companies/products that spend money with *them*, and lots of it. If we wanted to get PostgreSQL on their radar, it would be very expensive to do so unless/until they drastically change the way they pick the dots to place on their quad charts. And it is sad, but true, that lots of large enterprises put so much stock into what is essentially nothing more than a marketing channel (hence the preponderance of large companies and those with VC funding). Joe
Attachment
On 10/16/2015 08:24 AM, Joe Conway wrote: > If I remember correctly from years past when I paid any attention > whatsoever to Gartner, they primarily (only?) analyze companies/products > that spend money with *them*, and lots of it. If we wanted to get > PostgreSQL on their radar, it would be very expensive to do so > unless/until they drastically change the way they pick the dots to place > on their quad charts. And it is sad, but true, that lots of large > enterprises put so much stock into what is essentially nothing more than > a marketing channel (hence the preponderance of large companies and > those with VC funding). Yes, absolutely. Several years ago I had us appearing in the Forrester reports, because I'd helped out a Forrester staff member and he owed me. So PostgreSQL appeared in their industry reports for a few years. Then their staff changed, and, because we weren't a paying customer, they used the information I had supplied specifically to find fault with PostgreSQL after taking a big cash contract from Ingres (for example, we were portrayed as "insecure" because we disclose our security vulns.) This is not a game that we, as a non-profit open source project, can play. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com
On 10/16/2015 10:05 AM, Josh Berkus wrote: portrayed as "insecure" because we disclose our security vulns.) > > This is not a game that we, as a non-profit open source project, can play. Nor do we want to. Leave it to the used car salesman. We have our integrity, that is more important than market share. JD > -- Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564 PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development. New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.