public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
To: Joshua D. Drake <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Atkins <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: PostgreSQL-documentation <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:21:47 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>


I would think that companies that sell closed-source solutions for
PostgreSQL would be modest enough not to push their own agenda for the
documentation.  I think they should just sit back and hope others
suggest it.

[ Josh Berkus recently left Green Plum for Sun. ]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> 
> >> A big part of the value of Postgresql is the applications and extensions
> >> that support it. Hiding the existence of some subset of those just
> >> because of the way they're licensed is both underselling postgresql
> >> and doing something of a disservice to the user of the document.
> > 
> > OK, does that mean we mention EnterpriseDB in the section about Oracle
> > functions?
> 
> Way to compare apples to houses their Bruce. We are talking about
> *PostgreSQL* replication solutions. Not *Oracle* compatibility
> functions, However, *if* we had an Oracle compatibility section, I would
> say, "Yes it does make sense to list EnterpriseDB as a Proprietary
> Commercial solution to migrating from Oracle.
> 
> >  Why not mention MS SQL if they have a better solution?
> 
> Because we aren't talking about MS SQL, we are talking about PostgreSQL.
> 
> >  I
> > just don't see where that line can clearly be drawn on what to include.
> > Do we mention Netiza, which is loosely based on PostgreSQL?   It just
> > seems very arbitrary to include commercial software.
> 
> It is no more arbitrary than including *any* information on PostgreSQL
> replication solutions, because PostgreSQL doesn't have any.
> 
> PostgreSQL doesn't do replication, except for PITR (and that is pushing
> it as a replication solution).
> 
> Now.. there are *projects* that enable PostgreSQL to do replication.
> Some of them are Open Source, some of them are commercial products.
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to [email protected] so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   [email protected]
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +



view thread (117+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox