X-Original-To: pgsql-advocacy-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46B7ED1B50C; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:33:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 46133-08; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:33:37 -0300 (ADT) Received: from win.lh.vix.com (win.lh.vix.com [204.152.188.39]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2440D1B437; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 22:33:32 -0300 (ADT) Received: from house.payne.org (h000625e9c972.ne.client2.attbi.com [24.218.241.71]) (authenticated) by win.lh.vix.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3R3LIM13688; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 23:21:19 -0400 Received: from office2 ([10.19.69.1]) by house.payne.org (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id i3R1OeL2024934; Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:24:40 -0400 From: "Andrew Payne" To: "Bruce Momjian" , "PostgreSQL-development" Cc: "PostgreSQL advocacy" Subject: Re: What can we learn from MySQL? Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:31:33 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200404230409.i3N49jC02890@candle.pha.pa.us> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200404/247 X-Sequence-Number: 4219 Bruce asked an excellent question: > My question is, "What can we learn from MySQL?" I don't know there is > anything, but I think it makes sense to ask the question. After watching the traffic on this, the biggest MySQL lesson has gone largely unmentioned: that a well-funded, well-marketed, focused commercial entity clearly associated with the project can do wonders to overcome feature and technical shortcomings. At some point (probably there now), I think the lack of a "Postgres, Inc." is going to hinder adoption. Companies want to 'buy' from vendors that look like real, viable companies, and provide them products with support, training, features, and direction. With MySQL, you get one stop shopping. With Postgres, you've got to find and assemble the parts yourself. Most CIOs stop there, and start waiting for MySQL to get better before switching from Oracle. The other issue is marketing: in mature software markets, the best marketing (not the best technology) often wins. Without a sizeable marketing budget earmarked for Postgres, MySQL could be 60% as good and still win, unfortunately. For those that believe that the Linux kernel is a success model, don't forget that Red Hat had a lot to do with putting Linux on the map. And IBM. For those that look to Apache: Apache never had a well-established incumbent (Oracle), an a well-funded upstart competitor (MySQL). Rob McCool's NCSA httpd (and later, Apache) were good enough and developed rapidly enough that they prevented any other HTTP server projects from getting critical mass. The corollary to Bruce's question: where do *you* see the Postgres project in 3 years? Market share? Key features? Niche? Related: does MySQL stumble somehow, or do they keep gaining share? -andy