469,270 Members | 1,214 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,270 developers. It's quick & easy.

Ingres versus PostgreSQL

Guys,

Now that Ingres has been open-sourced, I'm curious about where it
stands with regards to PostgreSQL. Is it a worthy competitor?
PostgreSQL has been my database of choice for many years, and I'm very
interested in how Ingres and PostgreSQL stack up in terms of features
and performance.

Any insight you can provide will be very much appreciated. Thanks!

John

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

Nov 23 '05 #1
1 5662

John Wells <jb*******@gmail.com> writes:
Now that Ingres has been open-sourced, I'm curious about where it
stands with regards to PostgreSQL. Is it a worthy competitor?
PostgreSQL has been my database of choice for many years, and I'm very
interested in how Ingres and PostgreSQL stack up in terms of features
and performance.


I was curious about this too. I've been perusing the documentation for a bit
now.

It seems like ingres has done some interesting things that postgres hasn't.
But it hasn't done a lot of the cool things that postgres has either. So it's
really a case of each having complementary strengths.

My first impression is that while postgres has gone after building the most
flexible programmer-friendly system that lets programmers go wild with
customization and complex data structures; Ingres has gone after the features
administrators like for managing large databases.

So while I can find no mention of user-defined types, aggregate functions,
operators, etc. And as far as I can find, no way to add new server-side
languages. And so on. In fact their standard data types are pretty basic.
Nothing like cidr, no spatial data types (Actually I think these exist but
were excluded from the open source distribution). You're pretty much stuck
with the standard SQL data types.

On the other hand it has features Postgres doesn't have that are important.
You can configure multiple buffer caches for pages of different sizes and then
decide on a per-table basis which of those page sizes to use. It does have
partitioned tables support, something that's pretty high on my wishlist for
Postgres. I also noticed it has nested transactions. And it has
two-phase-commit support. And I certainly haven't read everything yet.

Basically it seems they've gone after the checklist items companies have on
their "enterprise-class features" lists. While postgres has gone after the
"wouldn't it be cool if I could do this" list. Which is a fairly typical
contrast between proprietary and open-source development.

Personally, as a developer, I like the types of software open source projects
develop. They're just more flexible, more comfortable to work with, and, well,
more fun. And postgres is impressive because it manages to get a lot of those
big enterprise features done too. 7.3, 7.4 and 8.0 all added major
"enterprise-class" features at an incredible pace.

--
greg
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Nov 23 '05 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

10 posts views Thread by michael newport | last post: by
33 posts views Thread by Joshua D. Drake | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Xavier Ambrosioni | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Gawel | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Simon Harris | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Nicholas Wieland | last post: by
2 posts views Thread by Nadeem Bitar | last post: by
1 post views Thread by CARIGAR | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.