* Rodrigo E. De León Plicet (rdeleonp@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > Any comments? Sure, they've never bothered to actually look at the data. Consider that for quite a while Oracle essentially refused to admit that their could *possibly* be bugs in their system (see: Unbreakable Linux, or whatever that foolishness was). They also ignored remotely-exploitable privilege escalation problems for *years* (oh, well, your databases should be behind firewalls with only "trustworthy" people who can access them directly... yeah, right). PG provides patches on a *very* consistent basis, based on need, and even more so, core works with the CVE process and provides patches and new releases accordingly (they don't just spring fixes on people..). Next, PG doesn't even use the same basic technology as Oracle regarding how transaction isolation and versioning works. Oracle using rollback segments to store 'old' rows in, while PG uses a Multi-Version Concurrency Control (MVCC) system. They're fundamentally different things, so the notion that PG is somehow a 'reverse engineered' Oracle is complete bunk. Adhereing to the same standard *doesn't* make something reverse enginered. Additionally, there's *tons* of features that are in PG which aren't in other RDBMS's, like, I dunno, *freakin' readline support*. Have you ever tried to actually *use* sqlplus on a regular basis? It's *horrid*. psql is miles ahead of sqlplus when it comes to a reasonable RDBMS client, this guy even admits that (immediately after saying PG hasn't got any features that other RDBMS's have...). Yes, you can use the rlwrap hack w/ sqlplus, but, seriously, when is Oracle going to bother investing in their principle CLI again? Never? Seems that way. Even mysql's CLI is better than sqlplus, and they own the code to both now.. I love how he finishes with the claim that Oracle "keep their finger on the pulse of where IT is headed", right after admitting that their client is actually a huge piece of junk. Thanks, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
