Interview with Josh Berkus of PostgreSQL

SilentBob4 writes "The PostgreSQL database project has recently released Version 8.0, which was received with quite some fanfare, mostly due to its first-ever Windows port. Mad Penguin talked with Josh Berkus, one of the core team members, to find out how 8.0 has fared since its official release on January 17, 2005. Full interview."

Incentive to switch

[poopdeville]

From TFA: I think that the thing that lots of open source projects have learned, and that those that haven't should learn, is the simple fact that millions of people use Windows, and millions of people use only Windows. If you don't have a port to that platform, you have denied them access to your project.

I think this is interesting. Now, I'm no PostgreSQL cheerleader, but they're certainly one of the top open source projects going around. It seems to me that if the PostgreSQL team had leveraged their position and spent more time developing for open operating systems, businesses would be given the incentive to switch. Instead, they've chosen to accomodate the enterprise windows crowd. Of course, this will be great for their marketshare. But it just seems like a missed opportunity given the bigger picture.

Re:Incentive to switch

[Anonymous Coward]

But they have nowhere else to go. The unwashed masses are using MySQL everywhere for running millions of blogs and messageboards. The average Linux user clings to MySQL like Windows users cling to Microsoft Office - unwilling and unable to take a second glance at anything else.

PostGres coming to Windows is good - because trying a new application is easier than trying a whole new operating system. Once someone knows what your app is, there's going to be far less resistance to trying it out on another OS. The pull is the app, a new OS is unfamiliar and scary. Once they know the app, the OS choice becomes less important and less scary because there's now something familiar there.

In other words, I think that a Windows port is healthy and will - in the long term - help to grow the number of open OS users of PostGres. (Because they start thinking "hey, I can run my cuddly PostGres database on Linux", not "I don't want to install Linux to try PostGres").

Re:Incentive to switch

[ctr2sprt]

Let's do unto others, here. Most Slashdotters prefer open source operating systems, but a lot of us are forced to use Windows because we need some program that only runs there. So we all beg developers to release Linux versions of popular programs and dream of a day when one app runs on all operating systems.

Since we know the pain of being forced to use an OS we dislike, let's try to be the Better Man here. If the tables someday turn, let's continue to encourage that apps get ported to every OS under the sun. Not because it helps us (it wouldn't, in this hypothetical world), but because it's the right thing to do.

By the same token, I support the PSQL folks porting their excellent software to Windows. Let those who, for whatever reason, want to run Windows make that choice themselves and still be able to run PSQL.

Re:Incentive to switch

[cakoose]

It seems to me that if the PostgreSQL team had leveraged their position and spent more time developing for open operating systems, businesses would be given the incentive to switch. Instead, they've chosen to accomodate the enterprise windows crowd.

This argument made its rounds a while ago. I think it was when a prominent KDE developer write about how it was a bad idea to port applications to Windows. The counter argument is that they're letting people switch to open source software a little bit at a time (which is easier). Once people are comfortable with using cross-platform applications exclusively, the Windows platform no longer has an unfair advantage. At that point, different operating systems can be judged on their own merits, instead of simply on the availability of application software.

Re:Kudos to Josh and the PostgreSQL team!

[Mr. Slippery]

Who needs data integrity.

Uh...everyone?

MySQL can run SELECT * faster than any database anywhere

Without data integrity, that just means you can get a wrong answer very quickly.

Re:Ever since I ran into unicode ... Pgsql has roc

[jilles]

Doesn't matter, the perception is that GPL is limiting redistribution (which it is, even if you are right). If you want choice in the matter (and most companies do), the GPL is not for you. Example, you have a bunch of propietary extensions to some GPL project and you are using it internally (so far so good you say). Then some partner company asks for permission to use your tool. You don't say no to friends so you want to give the software to them. Price is not the issue but opening up the proprietary stuff is. The GPL forces you to choose here and that is a very sound reason to not touch any GPL software that you want to extend.

Of course it is no argument to not use GPL software at all. GPL software is a key component of my development tool chain as I am sure it is for many others. And of course it is no argument against working on GPL projects either. It's not even an argument against the GPL. It's just that other licenses are a bit more flexible in what you can and cannot do. Many companies want this flexibility.