On Wed, 2004-10-06 at 18:44, Lew Bloch wrote: > "Scot L. Harris" averred: > > I made the switch after reading > > all the licensing info on Mysql's site and all the posts involved. It > > seemed much safer than having to worry about getting a commercial > > license from mysql for internal applications or ones that face > > customers. Did not need the hassle. I have found postgresql to be very > > good so far. And there is no quibbling on the licensing of it. > > What possible quibble could you have over the MySQL license? > Like I said before, after reading the information published on their site and a variety of discussions in various groups it was easier to make the move to postgresql. Technically both can do the job. Each has good points and each probably has problems in some areas. The licensing issue just tipped the scale enough. It was not worth worrying about licensing for an internal application which at one point it appeared that Mysql wanted you to have a license for such applications. It became even murkier for customer facing web applications, some things I read seemed to indicate you needed a license others indicated the opposite. Personally it was not worth the hassle to sort out when it was needed and when it was not. And since there was a perfectly acceptable alternative in postgresql I decided to use it instead. -- Scot L. Harris webid@xxxxxxxxxx There's no easy quick way out, we're gonna have to live through our whole lives, win, lose, or draw. -- Walt Kelly
