-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

It's even harder, as Oracle disallows publishing benchmark figures in
their license. As a cynic, I might ask, what Oracle is fearing?

Andreas

Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 6/18/07, David Tokmatchi <david.tokmatchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Scalability ? Performance? Benchmark ? Availability ? Architecture ?
>> Limitation : users, volumes ? Resouces needed ? Support ?
>
> Aside from the Wikipedia database comparison, I'm not aware of any
> direct PostgreSQL-to-Oracle comparison.
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGdrfHHJdudm4KnO0RAqKQAJ96t7WkLG/VbqkWTW60g6QC5eU4HgCfShNd
o3+YPVnPJ2nwXcpi4ow28nw=
=1CwN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

> 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.

Oracle also fears benchmarks made by people who don't know how to tune
Oracle properly...

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

PFC wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Oracle also fears benchmarks made by people who don't know how to
> tune Oracle properly...

Yes that is one argument that is made (and a valid one) but it is
assuredly not the only one that can be made, that would be legitimate.

Joshua D. Drake


>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
>


--

=== 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/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 6/18/07, Andreas Kostyrka <andreas@kostyrka.org> wrote:
>> As a cynic, I might ask, what Oracle is fearing?
>
> As a realist, I might ask, how many times do we have to answer this
> type of anti-commercial-database flamewar-starting question?
>

Well, my experience when working with certain DBs is much like I had
some years ago, when I was forced to work with different SCO Unix legacy
boxes. "Why do I have to put up with this silliness?", and with
databases there is no way to get a sensible tool set by "shopping
around" and installing GNU packages en masse

Furthermore not being allowed to talk about performance is a real hard
misfeature, like DRM. Consider:

1.) Performance is certainly an important aspect of my work as a DBA.
2.) Gaining experience as a DBA is not trivial, it's clearly a
discipline that cannot be learned from a book, you need experience. As a
developer I can gain experience on my own. As a DBA, I need some nice
hardware and databases that are big enough to be nontrivial.
3.) The above points make it vital to be able to discuss my experiences.
4.) Oracle's license NDA makes exchanging experience harder.

So as an endeffect, the limited number of playing grounds (#2 above)
keeps hourly rates for DBAs high. Oracle's NDA limits secondary
knowledge effects, so in effect it keeps the price for Oracle knowhow
potentially even higher.

Or put bluntly, the NDA mindset benefits completly and only Oracle, and
is a clear drawback for customers. It makes Oracle-supplied consultants
"gods", no matter how much hot air they produce. They've got the benefit
of having internal peer knowledge, and as consumer there is not much
that I can do counter it. I'm not even allowed to document externally
the pitfalls and experiences I've made, so the next poor sob will walk
on the same landmine.

Andreas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGdsT5HJdudm4KnO0RAoASAJ9b229Uhsuxn9qGfU5I0Q UfTC/dqQCfZK/b
65XQFcc0aRBVptxW5uzLejY=
=UIF6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



PFC wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Oracle also fears benchmarks made by people who don't know how to
> tune Oracle properly...

Well, bad results are as interesting as good results. And this problems
applies to all other databases.

Andreas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGdsXdHJdudm4KnO0RArTkAKCZs6ht4z0lb2zHtr5MfX j8CsTZdQCgmwE5
JAD6Hkul1iIML42GO1vAM0c=
=FMRt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

On 6/18/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
> It would appear that this was the flame-fest that was predicted.
> Particularly as this has been copied to five lists. If you all want
> to have an argument about what Oracle should or should not do, could
> you at least limit it to one list?

Yeah, Josh B. asked it to be toned down to the original list which
should've been involved. Which I think should be pgsql-admin or
pgsql-advocacy... your thoughts?

I think the Oracle discussion is over, David T. just needs URL references IMHO.

--
Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301
33 Wood Ave S, 3rd Floor | jharris@enterprisedb.com
Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> Certainly, but can one expect to get a realistic answer to an, "is
> Oracle fearing something" question on he PostgreSQL list? Or was it
> just a backhanded attempt at pushing the topic again? My vote is for
> the latter; it served no purpose other than to push the
> competitiveness topic again.

Well, I'm a cynic at heart, really. So there was no bad intend behind it.

And it was a nice comment, because I would base it on my personal
experiences with certain vendors, it wouldn't be near as nice.

The original question was about comparisons between PG and Oracle.

Now, I could answer this question from my personal experiences with the
product and support. That would be way more stronger worded than my
small cynic question.

Another thing, Joshua posted a guesstimate that PG can compete in 90-95%
cases with Oracle. Because Oracle insists on secrecy, I'm somehow
inclined to believe the side that talks openly. And while I don't like
to question Joshua's comment, I think he overlooked one set of problems,
namely the cases where Oracle is not able to compete with PG. It's hard
to quantify how many of these cases there are performance-wise, well,
because Oracle insists on that silly NDA, but there are clearly cases
where PG is superior.

Andreas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGds8WHJdudm4KnO0RAvb0AJ4gBec4yikrAOvDi5C3kc 5NLGYteACghewU
PkfrnXgCRfZlEdeMA2DZGTE=
=BpUw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:38:32PM -0400, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> I've picked -advocacy.

Actually, I _had_ picked advocacy, but had an itchy trigger finger.
Apologies, all.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
A certain description of men are for getting out of debt, yet are
against all taxes for raising money to pay it off.
--Alexander Hamilton

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Andrew Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 13:02 -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>
>> On 6/18/07, Andreas Kostyrka <andreas@kostyrka.org> wrote:
>>
>>> As a cynic, I might ask, what Oracle is fearing?
>>>
>> As a realist, I might ask, how many times do we have to answer this
>> type of anti-commercial-database flamewar-starting question?
>>
>>
>
> As a nudist, I think I have to answer, "About every 9 weeks, it would
> seem".

As a surrealist, I'd have to say purple.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster