On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Greg Williamson wrote:
>>
>> Our tests -- very much oriented at postGIS found Oracle to be between 5
>> and 15% _faster_ depending on the specifics of the task. We decided to go
>> with postgres given the price difference (several hundred thousand dollars
>> for
>> Oracle in the configuration we needed vs. zip for postgres -- we already
>> had
>> trained postgres DBAs).
>>
>
> Can always throw the licensing savings toward larger hardware too; $100K
> buys a pretty big server nowadays.
Hear hear! You can get a quad x 12 core (48 cores total) server with
128G ram and 32 15k6 hard drives for well under $25k nowadays. For
$50k or so you can throw 100 hard drives at the problem.
