6 ms·
Why not rename PostgreSQL officially (back) to Postgres?
Am I the only one who thinks PostgreSQL is better renamed (back) to its original Postgres? I prefer to pronounce it Postgres-sequel rather than Postgres ESS-QUE-ELL.
Since there isn't a double S in the name, is it Postgre SQL, in which case pronouncing without the SQL makes it Postgre, like a French word, or is there an invisible S, thus making it legal to pronouce it as Postgres ESS-QUE-ELL or Postgres SEQUEL?
Any time I am engaged in a query involving PostgreSQL, I always have a feeling that there is an unspoken agreement that the name is rather awkward, kinda uncool, that it is not quite right.
If the group still has the rights to the name they should simply rename it. A lot of the other database systems don't to feel the need to tack 'SQL' to the name. Oracle doesn't, MariaDB doesnt' DB2 doesn't,so why the need to retain it? Having to tag SQL on to the end makes it seem like the brand name cannot be established on its own without the SQL tag.
It may have been significant years ago given its roots but I think it is not that relevant in contemporary times.
- gii2 11y agoThis is being discussed here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Postgres https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Postgres
- pestaa 11y agoAre you sure? The page says it's deprecated and points to https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/ProjectName https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/ProjectName where it sums up that the short name is an accepted alias only. The decision dates back as far as 2007.
- SixSigma 11y agoDoes anyone ever say anything other than Postgres?
- slashnull 11y agoI thought it was meant to be "Postgres-Q-L" Edit: wow, the naming page says that Postgres-QL is a "weird derivation".
- dagw 11y agoFor what it's worth I've also always pronounced it "Postgres-Q-L".
- electroly 11y agoI think you misunderstood what that bullet point is trying to say. It IS "Postgres-Q-L". That bullet point is talking about someone theoretically thinking that the name is logically two parts: "Postgres" and "QL". When really it's "Postgres" and "SQL" and the middle S is elided.
- slashnull 11y agoBut it is Postgres - QL, because you have Postgres, the server, and its Query Language. Straightforward. ... okay no I was trolling
- facorreia 11y agoFrom the FAQ: > PostgreSQL is pronounced Post-Gres-Q-L. https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FAQ#What_is_PostgreSQL.3F_How_is_it_pronounced.3F_What_is_Postgres.3F https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FAQ#What_is_PostgreSQL.3F_H...
- cryptos 11y agoI agree with you. 1. everybody already calls the DB Postgres, and 2. there are some additions to classic SQL, which makes the "SQL" somewhat curious.
- jtchang 11y agoEveryone I know understands when I say Postgres. Maybe they should do a survey.
- slashnull 11y agoIs there a product called, or commonly referred to as "PSQL" that could be confused for PostgresSQL? Because I think the project should start advocating "PSQL". See, The competition is called "MySQL". One syllable, then SQL. You know what it does, and you know how to google it. It googles great, too. PSQL has the same advantages. Google even already understands it.
- nunwuo 11y agoThe good thing about the current name is that there's a clear distinction (at least to users "in the loop") between "psql", the command-line client, and "postgres" the backend service. I'm quite aggressively against renaming the product to "psql".