[wp-hackers] port of 2.1 to postgresql

Alex Günsche ag.ml2007 at zirona.com
Thu Mar 15 12:17:09 GMT 2007

On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 07:38 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > For example, if you have a plugin that takes advantage of MySQL's
> > FULLTEXT index feature, you will have a hard time providing a similar
> > functionality in PSQL.
> I think it's quite possible to do in postgresql there is a contrib  
> module for text search called tsearch2

Sure, and I'm not saying anything against porting WP to PGSQL. There
have actually been a couple attempts for a Postgres-based WP before.

I'd rather like to point out that the big advantage of limiting the DB
infrastructure to MySQL is for plugin authors to have one standardized
DB backend. This makes development much easier, especially when you are
dependent on some of the hard-coded MySQL features (such as the

>From the user's perspective, a PGSQL powered WP would not be able to use
all the plugins available for WP. So if e.g. a novice user comes along
and wants to install a plugin using the MySQL FULLTEXT search, he/she
might encounter an error saying something like "SQL error: Couldn't
create FULLTEXT index.", and they will be very confused. Of course this
would affect less than 5% of the plugins, but it must be considered when
distributing a WP version with a different DB backend.

I absolutely see the point in having a PGSQL powered WP. As long it is
maintained properly, and its users know the implications, it will surely
have its fans.


Alex Günsche, Zirona OpenSource-Consulting
work: http://www.zirona.com/ | leisure: http://www.roggenrohl.net
PubKey for this address: http://www.zirona.com/misc/ag.ml2007.asc

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list