Yet another round of EDB PR came out today and of course, some in the community disagreed with it. This time I was not a big objector although I do think their PR was a little misleading, I think it was generally a reasonable release and that the community needs to relax a bit. You can see that thread here.
Toward the end of the thread LewisC of An Expert's Guide to Oracle Technology fame popped his head up. Some of you will recall my recent blog discounting what some community members were portraying as a fight between EDB and CMD. He was an external source that blogged about the situation and in the process completely misinterpreted the point. It is great to see him actually participating in the community he is blogging on but I still think he doesn't get it. If you review a blog entry from LewisC a couple of weeks ago. Even with Josh Berkus trying to explain things to him, he seems to have a fundamental mental block on the situation.
Specifically "I" had a problem with the press release because it wasn't true. The press release explicitly stated that PostgreSQL could not perform as reliably or fast as EDB. Which is indeed not true and even EDB's co-founder Denis Lussier confirmed it.
Where LewisC seems to fall astray is here, "The funny part to me is that this is not a new message. It only becomes a problem when the purity of PostgreSQL is called into question. Say what you want about the evil proprietary vendors (or even that evil OTHER open source database that must not be named! HINT: MySQL. Oh my gosh did I say that out loud?) but don't diss THE POSTGRESQL!"
The problem is, it had not one single thing to do with the purity of PostgreSQL. It has to do with the facts. I even mention in the thread that if their PR is indeed true, that all they have to do is prove it (see my point about Denis Lussier above).
So LewisC, I wish you luck, but I hope that this helps you better understand what is really going on here.