Sim Zacks wrote:
> That isn't really an extensibility argument. At least not in my mind.
> Further I don't know of anyone that can "easily" do it. You either
> suffer the possibility of catastrophic data loss (dolphins) or you
> suffer guaranteed bank account drainage (Oracle), or you suffer the
> willingness of Monopolies (MSSQL).
>
> None of those equate to "easy".
That's a load of FUD. When looking at feature-sets that are available or
not
available in an open source product, you can't throw out all the things
that a
commercial, closed source project has because it isn't open source and
it costs
money.
You obviously didn't read my post.
The reason companies go with the closed source, expensive solutions is
because
they are better products.
Sometimes, sometimes not. It depends on your needs.
When evaluating a database for your company, it is better to look at
what the
closed source products offer that cause companies to shell out tons of
money and
decide if it is worth locking yourself into an expensive and/or
exclusive agreement.
The only thing this post could possibly be is a Troll. Please go back
under the bridge.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. rake
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
