[20220322-beans]

Can you elaborate what you mean by "comment about not built on Postgres is absurd? I said "It's not built on Postgres.", but I didn't say that was necessarily bad - though it is likely depending on the circumstances. Again, same for PHP, likely bad, but you'd need to know the circumstances, which is why I made the post.

My statement was a response to their employee's comment about the downsides of Postgres, which I quoted. I didn't say what avoiding Postgres is bad, 1. I quoted their unbacked comment, and then 2. I explained it is not bad to use Postgres and actually it's worse to roll your own database. Not sure where you got the fact they use Redis and Maria, that is not very clear on their website, but I found an article on Github: https://github.com/appwrite/appwrite/blob/master/CONTRIBUTIN...

It's much easier to understand Supabase (they use Postgres) vs. AppWrite (I could not find out what they use). They did mention their "new database: completely rewrote the Appwrite data management layer". https://medium.com/appwrite-io/everything-you-need-to-know-a...

[snapetom]

> I said "It's not built on Postgres.", but I didn't say that was necessarily bad

The three other bullet points are criticisms of Appwrite, and now you're going to claim the fourth point about being not being built on Postgres was not a criticism? You set the tone with your three other arguments. Don't try to claim the fourth wasn't in line.

The Maria and Redis are the first bullet two points in the link you gave. I also actually read the docker-compose file instead of inferring.

[20220322-beans]

It is your assumption to believe any of them are criticisms. In fact, none are.

"AppWrite is written in PHP", "AppWrite doesn't yet have their Cloud version" and "Not much progress is happening on the GraphQL side" are not criticisms, "It's not built on Postgres" is similar. These are just facts I've come across which others may like. Following each fact, I follow with my thoughts.

Christy Jacob, from AppWrite said an unqualified statement: "I'm trying to be as objective as I can, but building the entire ecosystem around a single product like Postgres ( even though tried and tested ) comes with its own downsides...", and that was my response.

This is a pointless meta discussion though, isn't it? It is childish to assume I meant everything has to be built on Postgres for me to use it, or to make it "proper". If you already think its obviously absurd, you should think why one would say it? Perhaps you misread or there is more to it.

[snapetom]

You’re flat out lying at this point.

> In fact, none are.

Original post:

> doesn't mean it is extensible, scalable or otherwise written well

I could go on but there is no sense in arguing with intellectual dishonesty.