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

Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 6/18/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> 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/