5 ms·
them citing the (excellent) Postgres documentation page count is hilarious. There is a really useful comparison to be made re: features / scope -- but approxim
by voganmother42 3y ago
them citing the (excellent) Postgres documentation page count is hilarious. There is a really useful comparison to be made re: features / scope -- but approximating that and punishing a project for how comprehensive their docs are...feels like lines of code as a productivity measure but like 10x less accurate or useful lol
- benbjohnson 3y agoAuthor here. My goal in the comparison was only in terms of scope, not that Postgres folks should be penalized for having good documentation. I think Postgres is great and it makes sense to use it when it's called for. But I think it can be overkill for many projects.
- voganmother42 3y agoMakes sense and I enjoyed the article. Estimating the complexity of using a project can be really...complex. I think about systems I have used which make it easy to use a minimal set of features and where I don't have to reason about or be negatively impacted by aspects I do not benefit from, and other systems where things are less easily isolated and more challenging to reason about. I do think the Postgres docs in particular seek to be a reference in addition to an operating manual and I for one really enjoy them. I think the point is well made that Postgres can be too much (or too much right now) for many projects.