> That seems to fit with the notion that MySQL(tm) represents a
> reasonable answer for "Web 2.0"; if database throughput isn't a
> bottleneck, then you can use even *less scalable* databases for those
> sorts of applications.
Has anyone ever considered that the only reason we are even compared to
MySQL is that MySQL and PostgreSQL are the only FOSS databases with
traction and market recognition?
Every show I go to, when people ask how we compare to MySQL my response
is; we don't, we compare to Oracle and DB2.
We all need to stop worrying about the cute dolphin, and focus on our
strengths. If we focus on our strengths we won't even have to recognize
that MySQL exists.
So how about instead of spending all this time on this thread we start
working on more articles, techdocs, case studies and benchmarks that
show that we totally kick arse!
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
