On 11/1/05, Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Jan Wieck <JanWieck@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote: > >> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big > >> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh, > >> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional > >> storage engine... > > > It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who > > will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle > > for free? > > People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to > get far with Oracle ;-). Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in > ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making > practically no dent in MySQL. Or PG for that matter. All they're > really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end > sales. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > Well to be fair, Oracle 10g Express is easy to install and admin. Basically you don't have to do any admin work and installing is as hard as clicking next 3 or 4 times. To me the only really nice thing Oracle has at this time is called HTML DB that provides a semi easy development tool that hooks into Oracle very easily. No need to write glue code such as connections and state as the dev tool provides all this. With that being said those of us who know better will not take that over Postgresql, but it will buy Oracle more market share that is for sure. Bob ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
