License blurb (was: Release, 3rd draft)

Folks,

Please take a look at the current draft, (both in docs and in CVS). I've
made a few changes:

1) Added a summary paragraph per Lance's suggestion. I merged it with the
1st paragraph and re-wrote the 2nd so that it flows.

2) Lance, I still need a title for you. What are you, R&D director? What?

3) I replaced the "these are the features" sentences with sub-headers.
Those sentences seemed redundant with the summary para.

4) After some reflection, I cut the stuff with OSDL. It's too much. We
mention 8-way and 16-way machines up above. If we really want the OSDL
stuff, then I'd say cut Merlin's quote and get one from Mark Wong.

Comments?

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 12:01:40PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Please take a look at the current draft, (both in docs and in CVS). I've
> made a few changes:
>
> 1) Added a summary paragraph per Lance's suggestion. I merged it with the
> 1st paragraph and re-wrote the 2nd so that it flows.
>
> 2) Lance, I still need a title for you. What are you, R&D director? What?

His title is Director of Products.

> 3) I replaced the "these are the features" sentences with sub-headers.
> Those sentences seemed redundant with the summary para.
>
> 4) After some reflection, I cut the stuff with OSDL. It's too much. We
> mention 8-way and 16-way machines up above. If we really want the OSDL
> stuff, then I'd say cut Merlin's quote and get one from Mark Wong.
>
> Comments?
>
> --
> --Josh
>
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

1st para:

If we're going to go with 2pc, it should be 2PC IMO. But I think it
would be better to spell it out (two-phase ocmmit).

New Advanced Features, para 2:
s#INOUT#IN/OUT#

The table partitioning section is a bit misleading in that it doesn't
actually help with large tables, it just makes partitioning a bit more
effective.

On the BSD/GPL horse, what about...

PostgreSQL is distributed under a BSD license, which unlike GPL licensed
software, allows use and distribution without fees for both commercial
and non-commercial applications.

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 12:01:40PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Please take a look at the current draft, (both in docs and in CVS). I've
> made a few changes:
>
> 1) Added a summary paragraph per Lance's suggestion. I merged it with the
> 1st paragraph and re-wrote the 2nd so that it flows.
>
> 2) Lance, I still need a title for you. What are you, R&D director? What?
>
> 3) I replaced the "these are the features" sentences with sub-headers.
> Those sentences seemed redundant with the summary para.
>
> 4) After some reflection, I cut the stuff with OSDL. It's too much. We
> mention 8-way and 16-way machines up above. If we really want the OSDL
> stuff, then I'd say cut Merlin's quote and get one from Mark Wong.
>
> Comments?
>
> --
> --Josh
>
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

Folks,

5) I've just checked our download stats. So far, we've only had about
11,000 beta downloads. If there's no accelleration, that could mean
about 20,000 downloads at the time of release. So, question, is 20,000
beta downloads impressive at all? Or does this make it a bad quote?

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

I'd try and focus more on # of beta testers, not # of downloads ... how
many "unique visitors" have downloaded the beta copy? "Over 1000 beta
testers ..." is more impressive, I think, then "20k downloads of the beta"
...

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Folks,
>
> 5) I've just checked our download stats. So far, we've only had about
> 11,000 beta downloads. If there's no accelleration, that could mean
> about 20,000 downloads at the time of release. So, question, is 20,000
> beta downloads impressive at all? Or does this make it a bad quote?
>
> --
> --Josh
>
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Jim,

> If we're going to go with 2pc, it should be 2PC IMO. But I think it
> would be better to spell it out (two-phase ocmmit).

Oh, right, missed that.

> New Advanced Features, para 2:
> s#INOUT#IN/OUT#

Really? I thought the technical term for the 3 types of params were IN,
OUT, and INOUT.

> The table partitioning section is a bit misleading in that it doesn't
> actually help with large tables, it just makes partitioning a bit more
> effective.

Suggested replacement language?

> On the BSD/GPL horse, what about...
>
> PostgreSQL is distributed under a BSD license, which unlike GPL licensed
> software, allows use and distribution without fees for both commercial
> and non-commercial applications.

I am *NOT* picking a fight with the FSF. Also, many people (myself
included) do not agree with MySQL's draconian interpretation of the GPL.

This would get us headlines, all right, but the wrong kind.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

How does it compare to 8.0?

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 12:42:03PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> 5) I've just checked our download stats. So far, we've only had about
> 11,000 beta downloads. If there's no accelleration, that could mean
> about 20,000 downloads at the time of release. So, question, is 20,000
> beta downloads impressive at all? Or does this make it a bad quote?
>
> --
> --Josh
>
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>

--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

Jim, Marc,

> How does it compare to 8.0?

Badly. 8.0 had a 6-month beta and was our first Windows version, so there
were over 200,000 downloads of the beta ... 80% Windows.

> I'd try and focus more on # of beta testers, not # of downloads ... how
> many "unique visitors" have downloaded the beta copy? "Over 1000 beta
> testers ..." is more impressive, I think, then "20k downloads of the
> beta" ...

Unfortunately, we don't seem to be collecting that information ... so I
have no way of discerning "unique visitors".

--Josh

--
__Aglio Database Solutions_______________
Josh Berkus Consultant
josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com www.agliodbs.com
Ph: 415-752-2500 Fax: 415-752-2387
2166 Hayes Suite 200 San Francisco, CA

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 12:45:05PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > If we're going to go with 2pc, it should be 2PC IMO. But I think it
> > would be better to spell it out (two-phase ocmmit).
>
> Oh, right, missed that.
>
> > New Advanced Features, para 2:
> > s#INOUT#IN/OUT#
>
> Really? I thought the technical term for the 3 types of params were IN,
> OUT, and INOUT.

Well, it's inconsistent with the usage in the first paragraph (IN/OUT).
And usually when I see a reference to the *concept* (which is what I'd
say the PR is), it's usually called IN/OUT as an umbrella term for
IN/OUT/INOUT.

> > The table partitioning section is a bit misleading in that it doesn't
> > actually help with large tables, it just makes partitioning a bit more
> > effective.
>
> Suggested replacement language?

Got a meeting so this is just a quick hack...

...the query planner is now able to entirely avoid scanning tables that
it knows will not have any data to satisfy a query. This feature, called
Constraint Elimination, utilizes constraints placed on tables to decide
if they have any valid data for a given query. This is the foundation
upon which table partitioning can be built.

> > On the BSD/GPL horse, what about...
> >
> > PostgreSQL is distributed under a BSD license, which unlike GPL licensed
> > software, allows use and distribution without fees for both commercial
> > and non-commercial applications.
>
> I am *NOT* picking a fight with the FSF. Also, many people (myself
> included) do not agree with MySQL's draconian interpretation of the GPL.
>
> This would get us headlines, all right, but the wrong kind.

Is there such a thing? :)

In any case, I definately think we need to raise awareness of the
licensing issue.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

>
>>On the BSD/GPL horse, what about...
>>
>>PostgreSQL is distributed under a BSD license, which unlike GPL licensed
>>software, allows use and distribution without fees for both commercial
>>and non-commercial applications.
>
>
> I am *NOT* picking a fight with the FSF. Also, many people (myself
> included) do not agree with MySQL's draconian interpretation of the GPL.
>
> This would get us headlines, all right, but the wrong kind.

I agree with that as well. The GPL does not prohibit commercial
distribution. It does prohibity proprietary/closed source distribution.

Commercial: Of or relationg to commerce.

The GPL does not prevent that in any way. I have actually had our
attorney review the MySQL terms, and he says there a crock.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

Jim, Josh, Lance:

> I would say ignore the number of beta downloads and focus on the number
> of community members assisting.

What's the number of unique posters to pgsql-bugs and pgsql-hackers since
beta started? Can anyone get me that number?

> Well, it's inconsistent with the usage in the first paragraph (IN/OUT).
> And usually when I see a reference to the *concept* (which is what I'd
> say the PR is), it's usually called IN/OUT as an umbrella term for
> IN/OUT/INOUT.

OK.

> ...the query planner is now able to entirely avoid scanning tables that
> it knows will not have any data to satisfy a query. This feature, called
> Constraint Elimination, utilizes constraints placed on tables to decide
> if they have any valid data for a given query. This is the foundation
> upon which table partitioning can be built.

Too technical. And we don't want to imply that we *don't* have table
partitioning; we have it as much as MySQL or Ingres has. Basically this
blurb is a careful balance between saying "We have Table Partitioning!"
and overhyping the feature.

> In any case, I definately think we need to raise awareness of the
> licensing issue.

Can you draft a short (4-6 line) paragraph for inclusion in the web-based
presskit (NOT the release)? WITHOUT saying anything bad about the GPL?

--Josh

--
__Aglio Database Solutions_______________
Josh Berkus Consultant
josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com www.agliodbs.com
Ph: 415-752-2500 Fax: 415-752-2387
2166 Hayes Suite 200 San Francisco, CA

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim, Josh, Lance:
>
>
>>I would say ignore the number of beta downloads and focus on the number
>>of community members assisting.
>
>
> What's the number of unique posters to pgsql-bugs and pgsql-hackers since
> beta started? Can anyone get me that number?
>

In Sept-05 there were: 1466 posts to hackers I have no idea how many of
those were unique posters.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:13:37PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Can you draft a short (4-6 line) paragraph for inclusion in the web-based
> presskit (NOT the release)? WITHOUT saying anything bad about the GPL?

How about...

Many open-source licenses place serious restrictions on commercial use
of software. These licenses are often "viral" in nature, requiring that
any software built using the licensed software must use the same
open-source license. This means any product built using that open-source
software must be made open-source itself. PostgreSQL uses the <a
href='..'>BSD license</a>, which only requires that the licensed source
code maintain it's copywrite and licensing information. Other than
that, you are free to do whatever you want with the code, including
re-distribute it commercially.

Other ideas welcome.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 01:51:31PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> >Jim, Josh, Lance:
> >
> >
> >>I would say ignore the number of beta downloads and focus on the number
> >>of community members assisting.
> >
> >
> >What's the number of unique posters to pgsql-bugs and pgsql-hackers since
> >beta started? Can anyone get me that number?
> >
>
> In Sept-05 there were: 1466 posts to hackers I have no idea how many of
> those were unique posters.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake

I think others are right; we're not going to be able to make the beta
numbers look good and should just drop the mention of it.

TBH, I'm actually wondering if we'll hit the same numbers we did with
8.0. Windows support was a huge feature, and I suspect it drove a lot of
those downloads are windows...

Hmm, looking at
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2005-09/msg00057.php,
there were 700,000 windows downloads out of 1M, meaning 300k non-windows
downloads, which is exactly the number we had for 'the previous version'
(whichever version that is). So based on that, *all* our growth has been
on windows.

Are we really 2x more popular on windows than on *nix?

I'm really thinking we need a trivially easy way for users to register
that they've started using version xyz of the database. I think we're
barely better than making WAGs here.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

Jim,

> Many open-source licenses place serious restrictions on commercial use
> of software. These licenses are often "viral" in nature, requiring that
> any software built using the licensed software must use the same
> open-source license. This means any product built using that open-source
> software must be made open-source itself. PostgreSQL uses the <a
> href='..'>BSD license</a>, which only requires that the licensed source
> code maintain it's copywrite and licensing information. Other than
> that, you are free to do whatever you want with the code, including
> re-distribute it commercially.

Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
criticizing other people's.

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 02:18:13PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Many open-source licenses place serious restrictions on commercial use
> > of software. These licenses are often "viral" in nature, requiring that
> > any software built using the licensed software must use the same
> > open-source license. This means any product built using that open-source
> > software must be made open-source itself. PostgreSQL uses the <a
> > href='..'>BSD license</a>, which only requires that the licensed source
> > code maintain it's copywrite and licensing information. Other than
> > that, you are free to do whatever you want with the code, including
> > re-distribute it commercially.
>
> Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
> criticizing other people's.

One issue is that many people seem to equate the two, so I think it's
going to be difficult/impossible to not have some negative verbage about
other licenses. But, I'll give it a shot...

PostgreSQL uses the BSD license. Unlike many other open-source licenses,
code licensed under a BSD license is completely free for any use,
commercial or not. The only requirement is that the licensed code must
always maintain it's license and copyright information.

Maybe also a sentence about checking with legal before deciding on a
product (since that will always be a win for us), but I can't think of a
way to word it. The idea is to get people to actually look into both
licenses instead of believing the word on the street. It's tempting to
just say "compare our 1/4 page license to the multi-page licenses you'll
find elsewhere". :P
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

> Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
> criticizing other people's.

PostgreSQL uses the <a> href='..'>BSD license</a>, which only requires
that the licensed source code maintain it's copyright and licensing
information. This provides for a very flexible and business friendly
licensing model.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 02:58:56PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > >
> > > Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
> > > criticizing other people's.
> >
> > One issue is that many people seem to equate the two, so I think it's
> > going to be difficult/impossible to not have some negative verbage about
> > other licenses. But, I'll give it a shot...
>
> See my last post. It isn't that hard. You just completely ignore the
> fact that the GPL even exists or any other license for that matter.
>
> There is only one open source license for this PR and that is the BSD
> license. We don't even have to mention the others.

Well, the original request was for something to go on the website and
specifically not in the PR. As such, the effect I want is for people to
actively investigate what the different licensing schemes mean, and to
ensure people understand that we're very different from the GPL (and
understand what restrictions other licenses have for those not aware).
That's why I think it's important to mention other licenses.

I do think your blurb would be great for the PR though.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

> >
> > Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license while not
> > criticizing other people's.
>
> One issue is that many people seem to equate the two, so I think it's
> going to be difficult/impossible to not have some negative verbage about
> other licenses. But, I'll give it a shot...

See my last post. It isn't that hard. You just completely ignore the
fact that the GPL even exists or any other license for that matter.

There is only one open source license for this PR and that is the BSD
license. We don't even have to mention the others.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> -
> Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
> PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
> Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
> Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
>

On Monday 03 October 2005 17:58, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > Too negative. We want to emphasize the positives of *our* license
> > > while not criticizing other people's.
> >
> > One issue is that many people seem to equate the two, so I think it's
> > going to be difficult/impossible to not have some negative verbage about
> > other licenses. But, I'll give it a shot...
>
> See my last post. It isn't that hard. You just completely ignore the
> fact that the GPL even exists or any other license for that matter.
>
> There is only one open source license for this PR and that is the BSD
> license. We don't even have to mention the others.
>

Agreed. I happen to use a lot of GPL software, and don't feel the need to
beat up on it.

"PostgreSQL is licensed under the business friendly BSD license, meaning it is
safe for use in both commercial products and open source projects, without
the worry of additional license fees."

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Jim, Josh, Lance:
>
>> I would say ignore the number of beta downloads and focus on the number
>> of community members assisting.
>
> What's the number of unique posters to pgsql-bugs and pgsql-hackers since
> beta started? Can anyone get me that number?

Very approx:

# grep ^From: pgsql-bugs.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort -u | wc -l
218
# grep ^From: pgsql-hackers.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort -u | wc -l
272

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Folks,

> # grep ^From: pgsql-bugs.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort -u
> | wc -l 218
> # grep ^From: pgsql-hackers.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort
> -u | wc -l 272

Well, that's no good either. Do we give up on the whole download counts
thing, or state the numbers in some other way (i.e. "15,000 downloads per
month")?

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Folks,
>
>> # grep ^From: pgsql-bugs.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort -u
>> | wc -l 218
>> # grep ^From: pgsql-hackers.2005[01][890] | awk -F: '{print $3}' | sort
>> -u | wc -l 272
>
> Well, that's no good either. Do we give up on the whole download counts
> thing, or state the numbers in some other way (i.e. "15,000 downloads per
> month")?

Nothing we are going to come up with is going to be as "impressive" as
MySQLs numbers, if that is what you are striving for here :( Personally,
I don't think that, in light of the fact that their 5.0 has been beta for
*eons* now, that their numbers are that impressive, but one has to put it
into perspective to arrive at that (5.0 has been beta for *how* long now,
over a year?) ...

Based on them being at version 5.0.13, according to FreeBSD ports, and I
believe, still beta ... that is 13 beta releases *so far* to our usual,
what, 4?

Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0?
If so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their
code *that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0? If
> so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their code
> *that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?

Their release model is quite different, there is no such thing as a feature
freeze until about beta 10. Until about beta 5 most features that should be
in the final product are still missing. After beta, there are gamma relases,
which rather matche our betas. MySQL beta software is so successul because
those are the only releases having some of the required features. And using
the current stable version would mean that your software will be completly
incompatible to the next release (see e.g. their changes to the TIMESTAMP
type from 4 to 4.1).

;-))

Although there is *some* truth in all this rant.

Best Regards,
Michael Paesold

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>
>>
>> Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0?
>> If so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their
>> code *that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?
>
> I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
> doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
> isn't any arguing that.
>
> Just because it is more popular doesn't make it better and if we try to
> compete on their metrics we are going to loose.

Sorry, hadn't worded my response to Josh particularly well ... I wasn't
suggesting that we should be doing such a comparison, *especially* not in
our press release :)

Was just trying to point out that # of beta downloads, or testers, really
doesn't mean anything, especially if there are so many bugs that it takes
>1year to get a product released ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664

>
> Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0?
> If so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their
> code *that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?

I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
isn't any arguing that.

Just because it is more popular doesn't make it better and if we try to
compete on their metrics we are going to loose.

We have to compete on our metrics...

PostgreSQL is the most advanced Open Source Database with enterprise
features that serious database developers demand, such as two-phase
commit, point in time recovery and tablespaces. Other popular (have to
have this caveat because of Ingres) Open Source Databases don't even
come close.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 08:41:53PM +0200, Michael Paesold wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> >Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0? If
> >so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their code
> >*that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?
>
> Their release model is quite different, there is no such thing as a feature
> freeze until about beta 10. Until about beta 5 most features that should be
> in the final product are still missing. After beta, there are gamma
> relases, which rather matche our betas.

Hmm, maybe we should include anonymous CVS checkouts and updates then.
I could give the number of CVS checkouts I did to my private CVSup
mirror; if all CVSup users do the same, we could come up with a
reasonably comparable number to MySQL beta downloads. Or not.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org
"Estoy de acuerdo contigo en que la verdad absoluta no existe...
El problema es que la mentira sí existe y tu estás mintiendo" (G. Lama)

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 11:46:05AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >
> > Didn't someone mention something like 2 000 000 beta downloads for 5.0?
> > If so, that an avg of 153k per beta ... with that many testers, is their
> > code *that* bad that they can't find all the bugs quicker then that?
>
> I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
> doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
> isn't any arguing that.
>
> Just because it is more popular doesn't make it better and if we try to
> compete on their metrics we are going to loose.
>
> We have to compete on our metrics...
>
> PostgreSQL is the most advanced Open Source Database with enterprise
> features that serious database developers demand, such as two-phase
> commit, point in time recovery and tablespaces. Other popular (have to
> have this caveat because of Ingres) Open Source Databases don't even
> come close.

You forgot to mention that we read and write to disk, instead of
/dev/random and /dev/null. ;P
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

Folks,

> > I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
> > doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
> > isn't any arguing that.

Right. However, this removes the whole thrust of the Lance quote. Does
anyone have a suggestion on what to do with the PR instead?

--Josh

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 03:00:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Folks,
>
> > > I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
> > > doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
> > > isn't any arguing that.
>
> Right. However, this removes the whole thrust of the Lance quote. Does
> anyone have a suggestion on what to do with the PR instead?

Well, it only removes part of it; that about our current beta. The last
version clearly showed a trend of increased downloads over the version
before that. Though I agree that the quote loses some of it's effect.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

Jim C. Nasby wrote:

>On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 03:00:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>
>>Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>>>>I don't think we should compare ourselves to the MySQL metric. It
>>>>doesn't do us any good. The reality is, MySQL is more popular. There
>>>>isn't any arguing that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>Right. However, this removes the whole thrust of the Lance quote. Does
>>anyone have a suggestion on what to do with the PR instead?
>>
>>
>
>Well, it only removes part of it; that about our current beta. The last
>version clearly showed a trend of increased downloads over the version
>before that. Though I agree that the quote loses some of it's effect.
>
>
Why not mix it in with the previous numbers from 8.x...

The 8 series continues it incredible growth as we release 8.1 with over
X number of downloads etc....

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/