Thread: 10g v. PostgreSQL 8.0 v. MySQL 5
Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
Jim, > Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: > http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 Not hardly. Lewis is a hard-core Oracle geek. But open-minded. He and I have been debating OSS vs. Proprietary databases on ITToolbox.com for some time. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 01:51:17PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > Jim, > > > Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: > > http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 > > Not hardly. Lewis is a hard-core Oracle geek. But open-minded. He and I > have been debating OSS vs. Proprietary databases on ITToolbox.com for some > time. Well, ok, maybe his bias wasn't overturned, but we still came out ahead despite it. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
>>>Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: >>>http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 >> >>Not hardly. Lewis is a hard-core Oracle geek. But open-minded. He and I >>have been debating OSS vs. Proprietary databases on ITToolbox.com for some >>time. > > > Well, ok, maybe his bias wasn't overturned, but we still came out ahead > despite it. How come he tested 8.0 and not 8.1? Is it an old article? Chris
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote: > >>>Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: > >>>http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 > >> > >>Not hardly. Lewis is a hard-core Oracle geek. But open-minded. He and > >>I have been debating OSS vs. Proprietary databases on ITToolbox.com for > >>some time. > > > > > >Well, ok, maybe his bias wasn't overturned, but we still came out ahead > >despite it. > > How come he tested 8.0 and not 8.1? Is it an old article? Judging by the date on the comments, it's from May at the latest. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
On Monday 12 December 2005 16:51, Josh Berkus wrote: > Jim, > > > Interesting article; author's bias for Oracle got overturned by us: > > http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/oracle/115560 I find the article poorly assembled and researched. It's biased towards Oracle because of some image in his head that hefails to adequately demonstrate. He muses too much about his personal feelings and very little about facts. 1. About His hunt for documentation: It's based on using 'one' search phrase. If he used other phrases then he should listthem at the end of the article. He didn't audit the documentation in the distribution nor the documentation on postgresql.org 2. About Installation: He didn't explain what his problem was when he attempted to install postgres on windows. 3. Verification of a successful Installation: There isn't enough proof describing his methodology. Sure I agree with keepingcomments short, which is why he should have included a link to an exhaustive list of what he did do to validate theinstall. 3. Creating the User Account: Who's the audience, people in the know or newbies? He mixes statements that assume you shouldbe familiar with databases with superferlous newbie comments implying it's a waste of postgres' need to take the extrastep of adding security. 4. Resource requirements: It's nice to be complimented however I want to know why i.e. details. How about using standardutilities that show the resources used? He failed to find hardware specs; what did he do, how did he look for it? There is no table at the end of the article that brings all the details, what little there is, together. Obviously, this person was more interested in getting his name up in lights than doing the job right. The article is usefulfrom the point of a human resources issue, I would never hire somebody who promises so much and performs so little. I've wasted enough time as it is making this reply.
Folks, It was pointed out that I struck a nerve in my last posting. There's always a polite way of voicing criticism. It would havemade for a less confrontational argument if I had taken my happy pill this morning and stuck to the facts that I wasarguing rather than ranting with strange sounds coming from my mouth about somebody I've never met. For the record, I am quite prepared to defend my analysis of the methodology used in the the article itself.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 03:58:33PM -0500, Robert Bernier wrote: > Folks, > > It was pointed out that I struck a nerve in my last posting. There's always a polite way of voicing criticism. It wouldhave made for a less confrontational argument if I had taken my happy pill this morning and stuck to the facts thatI was arguing rather than ranting with strange sounds coming from my mouth about somebody I've never met. > > For the record, I am quite prepared to defend my analysis of the methodology used in the the article itself. FWIW, I never claimed the article was good. ;) I just thought it was interesting that the author went in with a pro-Oracle bias and ended up judging us the winner (even though at least one of his scores for PostgreSQL was lower than deserved be a wide margin). -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461