Search Postgresql Archives

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [PERFORM] [ADMIN] Postgres VS Oracle

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

 



Jonah H. Harris wrote:
On 6/18/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Depends? How many times are you going to antagonize the people that ask?

As many times as necessary.  Funny how the anti-proprietary-database
arguments can continue forever and no one brings up the traditional
RTFM-like response of, "hey, this was already discussed in thread XXX,
read that before posting again."

Yeah funny how you didn't do that ;) (of course neither did I).


1. It has *nothing* to do with anti-commercial. It is anti-proprietary
which is perfectly legitimate.

As long as closed-mindedness is legitimate, sure.

It isn't closed minded to consider anti-proprietary a bad thing. It is an opinion and a valid one. One that many have made part of their lives in a very pro-commercial and profitable manner.


2. Oracle, Microsoft, and IBM have a "lot" to fear in the sense of a
database like PostgreSQL. We can compete in 90-95% of cases where people
would traditionally purchase a proprietary system for many, many
thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars.

They may well have a lot to fear, but that doesn't mean they do;
anything statement in that area is pure assumption.

95% of life is assumption. Some of it based on experience, some of it based on pure conjecture, some based on all kinds of other things.


I'm in no way saying we can't compete, I'm just saying that the
continued closed-mindedness and inside-the-box thinking only serves to
perpetuate malcontent toward the proprietary vendors by turning
personal experiences into sacred-mailing-list gospel.

It is amazing how completely misguided you are in this response. I haven't said anything closed minded. I only responded to your rather antagonistic response to a reasonably innocuous question of: "As a cynic, I might ask, what Oracle is fearing? "

It is a good question to ask, and a good question to discuss.


All of us have noticed the anti-MySQL bashing based on problems with
MySQL 3.23... Berkus and others (including yourself, if I am correct),
have corrected people on not making invalid comparisons against
ancient versions.  I'm only doing the same where Oracle, IBM, and
Microsoft are concerned.

I haven't seen any bashing going on yet. Shall we start with the closed mindedness and unfairness of per cpu license and support models?

Joshua D. Drake



--

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
             http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/



[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