What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?

[Sarah Tanembaum]

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the fundamental
differences between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial database (and
some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as Microsoft SQL
Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

[Volker Hetzer]

"Sarah Tanembaum" <sa************ *@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:c7******** ***@ID-205437.news.uni-berlin.de...

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the fundamental
differences between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial database (and
some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as Microsoft SQL
Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

No idea. What I like about oracle is the tools, especially rman and the wizards
and also the support. Paying for something gives me power over the guy I pay.
Also, I like to have lots of little screws to tailor my database to the specific hardware
and load profile.

Lots of Greetings!
Volker

[Fred Emmott]

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

Sarah Tanembaum wrote:

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the
fundamental differences between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial
database (and some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as
Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

I would recommend MySQL if you are looking for an alternative. I know
nothing of PostgreSQL, but I know that MySQL is suitable for use as a
high-usage database.

Fred
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAl95/ima0zti2BQgRAo6 FAJ0eUN3b9uYV86 budS8uVuhj492Of wCeJE92
/ZA1d4Uu1NdwN/Kmcuquh+Y=
=Q60M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Daniel Morgan]

Sarah Tanembaum wrote:

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the fundamental
differences between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial database (and
some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as Microsoft SQL
Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

PostgreSQL is highly overrated and not suitable for any environment
where little things like crash recovery and security are a priority.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Quirk]

"Sarah Tanembaum" <sa************ *@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<c7******* ****@ID-205437.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

Some rules of thumb, A guide to the perplexed:

- If you don't have the source code for a product, and the right to
modify and redistribute it in perpetuity, nothing you develop on top
of it can be relied upon, so therefore the open source applications,
or applications for wich you've been granted such rights via an
non-expiring licence, are much *MORE* suitable for high-end commercial
applications, since you are not locked into any external dependencies.

- Ideally, your Application's data access will be built around a data
abstraction layer that can use alternative database backends, i.e.
PEAR::DB.

- If your data is really important to you, you will use network, not
application or database level security to protect access to it.

- If your data is really important to you, you will only keep a
secondary copy of it in *ANY* SQL server for indexing and querying
purposes, not as the primary datastore.

- Your primary datastore should be self contained, self describing and
human readable, something like a heirarchy of XML files. This is the
best way to ensure the perminancy and portabilty of your important
data.

- Anyone who calls Free Software 'Freeware', implies that believing in
it is a 'religion' or thinks that it is low quality as a rule should
be considered unskilled labour, not a source of real advice.

I'm also in Berlin BTW :) I hope you had a fun May 1st.

Cheers.

[rkusenet]

"Daniel Morgan" <da******@x.was hington.edu> wrote

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the fundamental
differences between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial database (and
some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as Microsoft SQL
Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks

PostgreSQL is highly overrated and not suitable for any environment
where little things like crash recovery and security are a priority.

Why postgresSQL?? Why don't u say that all RDBMS except Oracle is
highly overrated. This way u don't have to fear about ur job for any
foreseeable future.

Your attitude reminds me of the attitude Americans had towards outsourcing
some 4/5 yrs ago. At that time all they could do is to arrogantly dismiss
outsourcing as unsustainable model. We all know what happened to them today.

I see lot of similarity between movement towards outsourcing few yrs
ago and now movement towards open source database. US companies, after
achieving cost savings thru outsourcing will next turn their attention
to money guzzling enterprise software like RDBMS. How long do you think
it will take them to realize that most of them don't deserve the price
tag they pay.

See ya after 3 yrs in Bangalore :-)

[Volker Hetzer]

"Quirk" <qu***@syntac.n et> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:4e******** *************** **@posting.goog le.com...

"Sarah Tanembaum" <sa************ *@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<c7******* ****@ID-205437.news.uni-berlin.de>...

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
application? Thanks
Some rules of thumb, A guide to the perplexed:

- If you don't have the source code for a product, and the right to
modify and redistribute it in perpetuity, nothing you develop on top
of it can be relied upon, so therefore the open source applications,
or applications for wich you've been granted such rights via an
non-expiring licence, are much *MORE* suitable for high-end commercial
applications, since you are not locked into any external dependencies.

That's not true. The main problem is not the right to the source code
but the right to get maintenance.
An example: How many corporations had UTF8 built into oracle before
the UTF8 enabled distribution came out?
Who implemented ANSI PL/SQL for mysql before the mysql developers did?
The right to modify is a red herring. If I'm prepared to spend man-years on having
a developer work itself into postgresql or mysql (plus set up all the QA stuff)
I can also ask any other db company for the price of a feature. Or, in case
of old versions, buy vintage support.

- Ideally, your Application's data access will be built around a data
abstraction layer that can use alternative database backends, i.e.
PEAR::DB. Which either gives me the freedom to write nonportable code
("create bitmap index", "where A(+)=B") or loses efficiency
on all but the dumbest platform.

- If your data is really important to you, you will use network, not
application or database level security to protect access to it. Wrong. If it's important it must not matter whether one tries to
access the data from a local or remote machine. A defense in depth
will always include a securely configured database.


- If your data is really important to you, you will only keep a
secondary copy of it in *ANY* SQL server for indexing and querying
purposes, not as the primary datastore. The primary store is the safe with the tapes of last night. So what?
- Your primary datastore should be self contained, self describing and
human readable, something like a heirarchy of XML files. This is the
best way to ensure the perminancy and portabilty of your important
data. Until the next version can't read the old format (or DTD in the XML case).
In any case, permanency across more than two major database or other
software releases is difficult, regardless of the format.
- Anyone who calls Free Software 'Freeware', implies that believing in
it is a 'religion' or thinks that it is low quality as a rule should
be considered unskilled labour, not a source of real advice.

It's not "low quality" as a rule, at least not as long as one reduces product
quality to code quality. The problem is that as soon as the developers feel
they are fed up with the product or get a real job they dump the code
on you and leave you alone with it. They get nothing, so they are not
required to do anything.
So, I'd only trust mysql if I could do a contract detailing response times,
recovery services, a patch process and all that. Since I then have to
pay anyway, I might as well go for the company that's best at it. Oracle
has a reputation for that and after 5 service requests I've never been
disappointed yet. No idea how IBM or M$Soft do in the service area.

Lots of Greetings!
Volker

[Daniel Morgan]

rkusenet wrote:

"Daniel Morgan" <da******@x.was hington.edu> wrote

Beside its an opensource and supported by community, what's the fundamental
difference s between PostgreSQL and those high-price commercial database (and
some are bloated such as Oracle) from software giant such as Microsoft SQL
Server, Oracle, and Sybase?

Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
applicatio n? Thanks

PostgreSQL is highly overrated and not suitable for any environment
where little things like crash recovery and security are a priority.

Why postgresSQL?? Why don't u say that all RDBMS except Oracle is
highly overrated

Because saying so wouldn't be true. There are documented security and
recovery practices for all of the commercial RDBMS products. There are
books, case studies, and years of experience from industry professionals
supporting the fact that while they may be different ... they all work.
The same can not be said for PostgreSQL. MySQL, in this regard, has a
far better record.

Care to disagree? Fine. Provide the names of 5 major commercial
installations of PostgreSQL.

I'll do it for the Oracle side.
1. Amazon.com
2. Mastercard
3. Visa
4. Federal Bureau of Investigation
5. Boeing Commercial Airplane Group
6. Bank of America
7. Washington Mutual Bank
8. American Express
9. Starbucks
10. Oracle Corporation

There ... gave you five more for free. If you've got something to
talk about ... name names ... otherwise stop promoting freeware
as though it was worth more than its price.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[rkusenet]

"Daniel Morgan" <da******@x.was hington.edu> wrote

Because saying so wouldn't be true. There are documented security and
recovery practices for all of the commercial RDBMS products. There are
books, case studies, and years of experience from industry professionals
supporting the fact that while they may be different ... they all work.
The same can not be said for PostgreSQL. MySQL, in this regard, has a
far better record.

Care to disagree? Fine. Provide the names of 5 major commercial
installations of PostgreSQL.
Mine was a comment on ur attitude towards any non oracle product.
I can show examples where you attacked MYSQL also. Just like you
attack DB2/Informix and your pet hate object SQLServer.

You are right that MySQL has a far better record than PostgreSQL
and IMO they will give all commercial RDBMS a run for their money.

I can only spell PostgreSQL. So I can't name any installations
of PostgreSQL.
There ... gave you five more for free. If you've got something to
talk about ... name names ... otherwise stop promoting freeware
as though it was worth more than its price.

Freeware also includes MySQL. (actually they are no longer free
for profit oriented corporations)

[Mikito Harakiri]

Fred Emmott <pc*******@hotm ail.com> wrote in message news:<1d******* *****@fred.lan> ...

I would recommend MySQL if you are looking for an alternative. I know
nothing of PostgreSQL, but I know that MySQL is suitable for use as a
high-usage database.

You are kidding, right? Out of curiosity I took a look at MySQL
performance tuning manual. It's almost empty. The example where their
engine picks up Cartesian Product due to type mismatch is strikingly
naive. Scanning a single table by index that MySQL seems to emphasize
is not a benchmark.