Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> writes:
> tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us (Tom Lane) writes:
>> I've been trying to figure out what it is that Oracle gets out of
>> this, assuming that they don't see MySQL as a serious threat to
>> their core business.
> [ snip ]
> Of course, if the "ability to support R/3" requires InnoDB stuff, then
> this means Oracle just did a nice job of cutting off this strategy...
Ah-hah. *Now* it's all clear: an alternative to Oracle for SAP would
definitely be a strong threat to Oracle's bottom line. I think we just
found the real motivation.
(BTW, has anyone looked lately to see how far away Postgres is from
being able to run SAP?)
regards, tom lane
