On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 01:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I think it's funny to consider a specific recommendation for SQLite as > > being out of line when you look at the history here. The whole reason > > that software even exists is because of the difficulty of using PostgreSQL > > in this context. See http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6650 > > I've got nothing against SQLite. But I am unhappy with the idea of us > recommending *any* particular bit of software that is not under our > control, especially in a document that is as widespread and hard to > update as our FAQ. There are any number of scenarios where we might > want to take back such an endorsement, but once made it'll be out there > somewhere on the Web until cockroaches rule the earth. There is also > the whole class of arguments about "why'd you recommend X and not Y?" > that we'd surely get sucked into. Better not to go there in the first > place.
>From a users point of view - both PostgreSQL and other embedable databases aka file handlers I have to agree - suggesting an alternate product might belong in a book but not in a FAQ which is relevant to PostgreSQL and an integral part of the PostgreSQL documentation. -- Regards Theo -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://mail.postgresql.org/mj/mj_wwwusr?domain=postgresql.org&extra=pgsql-docs
