Re: Licensing - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Dawid Kuroczko
Subject Re: Licensing
Date
Msg-id 758d5e7f05031102121dfd092f@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Licensing  ("James Tillman" <JamesTillman@sevatechnologies.com>)
List pgsql-advocacy
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:01:47 -0500, James Tillman
<JamesTillman@sevatechnologies.com> wrote:
> I just wanted to say thanks to all who responded to my question regarding
> licensing.
>
> Although I'm fairly certain that it would be legal for my client to use
> MySQL in the manner we intended, despite what the sales rep said, the client
> doesn't like ambiguity, so we'll likely be going with PostgresQL, unless
> Oracle cuts them a nice deal!  (Client is heavily into Oracle).

If so, you would be much happier with PostgreSQL than MySQL.
IMHO PostgreSQL is much closer to Oracle than MySQL when it
comes to SQL.  Things like transactions, views, procedural languages,
referential integrity, triggers, etc. are either not done yet, in beta
stage or rarely used. :)

   Regards,
      Dawid

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Jean-Paul Argudo
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Patents: no position against ?
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and Patents: no position against ?