3 ms·
Interesting but I wonder how accurate it really is. Two (at a minimum) of the metrics in their average can't really be used to measure popularity (of use): -
by smoyer 13y ago
Interesting but I wonder how accurate it really is. Two (at a minimum) of the metrics in their average can't really be used to measure popularity (of use):
- Number of mentions of the system on websites
- General interest in the system
There are two different problems with these metrics:
- Both will include people who have negative opinions of the system. There's no effective way to separate out the people who are discussing their distaste for a system (remember comcastsucks.com?).
- Both are subject to misrepresentation caused by external factors such as the quality of the system's documentation, use of forums for support and how consistent the system is in general. Some systems require much more research to be run in a stable fashion.
I've used Oracle, PostgreSQL and CouchDB extensively and MySQL plus a couple other to a (much) lesser extent and I get the sense that the rankings are in the right order (I have no idea about MSSQL) but I doubt that the scale is so logarithmic.
- pfarrell 13y agoMention of the database, no matter the popularity, are signals of its use and the activity of it's community. I guess it depends if you consider the definition of popularity as whether it's liked, or whether it's deployed and being used. They should make the raw data available if they want this to be believed. I'd like to know to which metrics most contribute to a specifics db's rank. I have a problem, however, with the use of google as a source. Not sure how you can trust it to give you an unbiased result now that it produces personalized results using who knows what (ie incognito on chrome still exposes IP addresses)
- jeltz 13y agoYeah, the order looks about right but the jumps in numbers look far too large. DB2 should also probably be a bit lower, after SQLite and MongoDB.