zhong ming wu wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Howard Rogers <hjr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > For what it's worth, I wrote up the performance comparison here: > > http://diznix.com/dizwell/archives/153 > > I always thought there is a clause in their user agreement preventing > the users from publishing benchmarks like that. I must be mistaken. Perhaps not as I remember such issues a few years when the company I worked at profiled postgres against Oracle. Oracle doesn't want poorly-tuned systems being used as benchmarks. Or so they claim. Our tests -- very much oriented at postGIS found Oracle to be between 5 and 15% _faster_ depending on the specifics of the task. We decided to go with postgres given the price difference (several hundred thousand dollars for Oracle in the configuration we needed vs. zip for postgres -- we already had trained postgres DBAs). YMMV. Greg Williamson -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
