Search Postgresql Archives

Re: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_[ADMIN]_Oracle_and_Postgresql_Play_Nice_Together_on_Same_Computer??=

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


Troyston Campano <troygeekdatabase@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on 20.01.2005, 06:03:28:
I am an Oracle DBA and I want do a Postgresql 'proof of concept' at the
large corporation where I work to test the benefits of using Postgresql in
our environment. I want to install Postgresql onto a "production" server
that currently runs Oracle. Are there any problems with running Postgresql
and Oracle on the same machine? I mean, I've heard that the way Sybase and
DB2 UDB are architected to handle memory hurts Sybase when DB2 UDB is
installed on the same machine as the Sybase Server (something about UDB
eating up all the memory and not giving it back to Sybase).



Are there any issues running Postgresql and Oracle on the same
machine.anything special to know about memory, disk layout, and things like
that? I just want to make sure the two engines play together on this same
server. I had a hard time finding information about this via google.


There should be no issues running both on the same machine. Running both together at the same time isn't a good way of doing a benchmark though...

I would question your intent slightly. Should it be a relative
comparison? Or should it be an assessment of what PostgreSQL is capable
of and whether that fits a sufficient number of your needs to make it
worth adopting?

There are many ways to structure a decision as to whether PostgreSQL is
suitable for your (business?) needs. Which structure you choose is
likely to prejudice your decision, one way or the other. i.e. if
capital acquisition costs are the decising factor, then PostgreSQL
would always win.

I may add that using the right tool for the right task should be a priority. It's easy to underestimate the cost of continuosly adapting your needs to the tool and not the opposite.

About Oracle I keep hearing success or horror stories. About PostgreSQL
mostly success stories, some unsuccess stories ("it's good but we switched
back to MS SQL" ), _very_ few horror stories. Last horror story was about "data worth having but not backupping", a category existing only
in some manager's mind (and _deserving_ a horror story).


Note that I've never heard any unsuccess story about Oracle. I know some people that would tell one, if only they actually tried PostgreSQL
out - but that's my opinion, not thiers (yet).


IMHO, migrating from Oracle to PostgreSQL usually doesn't expose all PostgreSQL pros, and will expose some weaknesses or missing features.
Migrating from PostgreSQL to Oracle is what really makes PostgreSQL shine.
Too bad it happens so rarely. :-)


.TM.
--
      ____/  ____/   /
     /      /       /			Marco Colombo
    ___/  ___  /   /		      Technical Manager
   /          /   /			 ESI s.r.l.
 _____/ _____/  _/		       Colombo@xxxxxx

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]
  Powered by Linux