On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:08:27 -0400 Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Andrej Ricnik-Bay" <andrej.groups@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On 14/03/2008, rrahul <rahul.rathi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I see Mysql bosting for Google,Yahoo, Alcatel...... > >> What about Postgres the list is not that impressive. > > > What then? Could it be marketing or the sad results of a > > avalanche effect? Geee, there's a thought. > > Marketing. Remember that MySQL AB have a strong financial > incentive to make organized efforts to locate and publicize > impressive-sounding users of MySQL. (I've heard rumors they even > give licensing discounts to companies that will let their names be > used like that.) > > There is no comparable effort happening on the Postgres side. > There are plenty of impressive users of PG too, but they don't have > to talk about it. I still find impressing that Google uses MySQL... I can guess why, I'd enjoy to hear a more informed opinion. I'd say: 1) legacy 2) no particular interest in data integrity/coherence Something more here http://www.postgresql.org/about/casestudies/ and a bit updated would help too. -- Ivan Sergio Borgonovo http://www.webthatworks.it -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
