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.


Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ

Reply via email to