On 09/02/2014 11:52 AM, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa wrote: > > On 02/09/14 11:44, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> For 9.4, we have the media already saying "Postgres has NoSQL >> capabilities" (which is only partially true). For x.y we could >> have the media saying "Postgres adds Oracle compatibility" (which >> would be only partially true). But that brings a lot of users to >> postgres, and that helps us all. >> >> >> Partial true can enforce so lot of people will hate postgres too. >> False promises are wrong > > Then let's stop talking about postgres being NoSQL. NoSQL is > basically "schema-less" (really bad name) plus "infinite scalability" > (which basically means transparent sharding). We fail to provide the > latter very clearly... Have you ever tried any of the "real" NoSQL products version of "infinite scalability" ?
We are no worse than most if you use just the unstructured part (which is what the NoSQL crowd provides) and something like pl/proxy for scaling. Cheers -- Hannu Krosing PostgreSQL Consultant Performance, Scalability and High Availability 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ