What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Sarah Tanembaum, May 4, 2004.

  1. 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
    Sarah Tanembaum, May 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Sarah Tanembaum

    Rove Monteux Guest

    Bit offtopic, but yes, indeed it is. Starting point on that,

    http://advocacy.postgresql.org/casestudies/


    Cheers

    Rove


    --
    Rove Monteux
    Systems Administrator


    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
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Rove Monteux, May 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Sarah Tanembaum" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:c78jfi$vomj$-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
    Volker Hetzer, May 4, 2004
    #3
  4. Sarah Tanembaum

    Fred Emmott Guest

    -----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/ima0zti2BQgRAo6FAJ0eUN3b9uYV86budS8uVuhj492OfwCeJE92
    /ZA1d4Uu1NdwN/Kmcuquh+Y=
    =Q60M
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Fred Emmott, May 4, 2004
    #4
  5. Sarah Tanembaum

    Tom Copeland Guest

    On Tue, 2004-05-04 at 14:23, Fred Emmott wrote:
    > > Is PostgreSQL reliable enough to be used for high-end commercial
    > > application? Thanks


    PostgreSQL runs RubyForge... it's not very high volume - half million
    records, 70-80K queries a day - but it does the job.

    <shameless>
    Good tools for it too! http://pqa.rubyforge.org/
    </shameless>

    Yours,

    Tom
    Tom Copeland, May 4, 2004
    #5
  6. Sarah Tanembaum

    Armin Roehrl Guest

    Postgresql and MySQL are both very impressive.

    The latest Oracle 10g comes with zillions of features that might
    be relevant to you or not.

    Oracle 10g has many features you might maybe never need,
    but mysql cluster does not yet contain. I do not know much
    about the latest DB2 clustering possibilities.

    These "monster" Databases like Oracle are more than just
    a database. You have tons of platform integration possibilities.

    I think the choice really depends on what you are going todo
    and there is no simple answer.

    Good luck,
    -Armin
    Armin Roehrl, May 4, 2004
    #6
  7. Sarah Tanembaum

    rkusenet Guest

    "Daniel Morgan" <> 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 :)
    rkusenet, May 4, 2004
    #7
  8. Sarah Tanembaum

    rkusenet Guest

    "Daniel Morgan" <> 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)
    rkusenet, May 5, 2004
    #8
  9. Fred Emmott <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > 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.
    Mikito Harakiri, May 5, 2004
    #9
  10. Sarah Tanembaum

    Dusan Bolek Guest

    "rkusenet" <> wrote in message news:<c78quu$136n3$-berlin.de>...
    > 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.


    Yes, you've got the point. Behind both of these models (outsourcing
    and free soft) is the idea that the quality is not important, the only
    thing that matter are costs and their cuts. And you're also true that
    freeware alternatives will earn their place. In the world where CIO is
    one year temp job and the best thing on CIO's CV is cutting cost to
    10% and sack off 80% of internal staff because of outsourcing to
    India, in this world free databases are very tempting way to go. Of
    course, the outcome will be lowered availability, higher maintenance
    costs, security problems and damaged business reputation, but who gave
    a f*ck, we saved 90% of our internal IT budget.

    --
    Dusan Bolek

    Email:
    Pls add "Not Guilty" to the subject, otherwise your email is going to
    be burnt as a SPAM.
    Dusan Bolek, May 5, 2004
    #10
  11. Sarah Tanembaum

    Guest

    "rkusenet" <> wrote in message news:<c79fr5$1bi40$-berlin.de>...
    >
    > 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)


    Evident you are mislead by the 'Free is better' religion and you don't
    care for robustness and stability. Otherwise you wouldn't state MySQL
    will give all commercial RDBMS a run for their money. If you would
    honestly compare the architecture of Oracle (and most other commercial
    RDBMSes) and you would be frank, you would have to admit MySQL is a
    toy. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Evidently, there are too many people around in the field, who never
    *learned* to develop robust applications and databases, and who mainly
    deliver software which is hacked together. Of course, this mentality
    perfectly suits the Open Source Community. I wouldn't want to be in
    anyone shoes if your silly assertion becomes true, because that means
    the bean counters have finally won, and are going to ruin their own
    employers by trading in robust, stable and scalable software like
    Oracle for toys like MySQL.

    Also, you are evidently being dishonest, and contradicting yourself.
    You both don't know any PostgreSQL, while you hail it as being better
    than Oracle, and you label MySQL as free software, and in the same
    phrase you have to admit MySQL isn't true.
    I would take better care before you start accusing people here.

    Sybrand Bakker
    Senior Oracle DBA
    , May 5, 2004
    #11
  12. Sarah Tanembaum

    rkusenet Guest

    "Dusan Bolek" <> wrote in message news:...

    > Yes, you've got the point. Behind both of these models (outsourcing
    > and free soft) is the idea that the quality is not important, the only
    > thing that matter are costs and their cuts.


    This isn't about the subject of this thread, but it got me curious.

    Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    I will post the link later. Don't have it now.
    rkusenet, May 5, 2004
    #12
  13. [JT] Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?

    --T4sUOijqQbZv57TR
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline

    On Wed, May 05, 2004 at 03:19:08PM +0900, Dusan Bolek wrote:
    > Behind both of these models (outsourcing and free soft) is the
    > idea that the quality is not important, the only thing that
    > matter are costs and their cuts.


    BS. Revisit your Economics lessons.

    > in this world free databases are very tempting way to go. Of
    > course, the outcome will be lowered availability, higher
    > maintenance costs, security problems and damaged business
    > reputation, but who gave a ****, we saved 90% of our internal
    > IT budget.


    YABS. Or just trolling? :)

    /me returns to Pickaxe and some LiveCD-related stuff to help
    people (*shrug*) cut on their IT/win32 budgets. That is, throw
    less money away.

    PS: somehow my spamfilter was totally correct on this post...
    probably I'd better ignore the troll altogether. :)

    --
    ---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <>
    ------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/

    --T4sUOijqQbZv57TR
    Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
    Content-Disposition: inline

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAmNm9bsPDprYMm3IRAmniAKCxumRkUMaQ9P94ZxxZK72OP7/TTACgvo2U
    6bMCHsqMbnXssk1DlsgX47U=
    =gQIK
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --T4sUOijqQbZv57TR--
    Michael Shigorin, May 5, 2004
    #13
  14. Sarah Tanembaum

    rkusenet Guest

    "rkusenet" <> wrote in message
    news:c7af0p$1jfmr$-berlin.de...

    > Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    > I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    > outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    > in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    > I will post the link later. Don't have it now.


    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1583257,00.asp?kc=EWNWS050304DTX1K0000599
    rkusenet, May 5, 2004
    #14
  15. rkusenet wrote:
    >
    > "rkusenet" <> wrote in message
    > news:c7af0p$1jfmr$-berlin.de...
    >
    > > Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    > > I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    > > outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    > > in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    > > I will post the link later. Don't have it now.

    >
    > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1583257,00.asp?kc=EWNWS050304DTX1K0000599


    Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You seem to be implying that
    outsourcing to India *does not* mean a reduction in quality and then you
    post an article which says the quality is not necessarily better. Which
    is your viewpoint?

    Cheers,
    Brian

    --
    ===================================================================

    Brian Peasland
    dba@remove_spam.peasland.com

    Remove the "remove_spam." from the email address to email me.


    "I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
    the three"
    Brian Peasland, May 5, 2004
    #15
  16. Sarah Tanembaum

    rkusenet Guest

    "Brian Peasland" <dba@remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote in message
    news:4099104F.F5CC564B@remove_spam.peasland.com...
    > rkusenet wrote:
    > >
    > > "rkusenet" <> wrote in message
    > > news:c7af0p$1jfmr$-berlin.de...
    > >
    > > > Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    > > > I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    > > > outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    > > > in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    > > > I will post the link later. Don't have it now.

    > >
    > > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1583257,00.asp?kc=EWNWS050304DTX1K0000599

    >
    > Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You seem to be implying that
    > outsourcing to India *does not* mean a reduction in quality and then you
    > post an article which says the quality is not necessarily better. Which
    > is your viewpoint?


    No I am not contradicting. I was giving a link to Dusan Bolek
    which shows that how some believe that outsourcing increases quality
    and how some think it is not.
    if everyone believed like Dusan, why would there be a need to debunk
    myth, right? Won't it be taken as granted that outsourcing means
    poor quality.
    rkusenet, May 5, 2004
    #16
  17. Brian Peasland wrote:

    >rkusenet wrote:
    >
    >
    >>"rkusenet" <> wrote in message
    >>news:c7af0p$1jfmr$-berlin.de...
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    >>>I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    >>>outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    >>>in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    >>>I will post the link later. Don't have it now.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1583257,00.asp?kc=EWNWS050304DTX1K0000599
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You seem to be implying that
    >outsourcing to India *does not* mean a reduction in quality and then you
    >post an article which says the quality is not necessarily better. Which
    >is your viewpoint?
    >
    >Cheers,
    >Brian
    >
    >
    >

    There is no sense belabouring this because in both places they are just
    people both w/better and lesser skills at certain things in certain
    contexts.Certainly 15k for a programmer is better than 75k. If you look,
    you could find a 15k programmer better thatn the 75k programmer here -
    and vice versa.

    Back to the topic of the thread. I've not used Oracle much(and when i
    did it thought it was overly complex) but I've used A LOT of MS SQL and
    mysql (and a little postgres). My needs have been quite simple so i
    really do not know enough to know the things that I might be missing.
    Even after facing(and not fully rectifying) the 'Mysql has gone away'
    problem(from both php and ruby:dbi) I still would rather use mysql than
    mssql. I suppose this has more to do with ruby and less to do with the
    db but that's my pennies worth.

    'You get what you pay for'.
    'Good enough is good enough when good enough is all you need.'
    Paul Vudmaska, May 5, 2004
    #17
  18. Sarah Tanembaum

    NorwoodThree Guest

    > This isn't about the subject of this thread, but it got me curious.
    >
    > Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    > I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    > outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    > in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    > I will post the link later. Don't have it now.


    I am going to go out on a limb and say worse quality work because I
    can't understand them when I talk to them on the phone.
    NorwoodThree, May 5, 2004
    #18
  19. OT: Re: What so special about PostgreSQL and other RDBMS?

    On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 02:53 +0900, NorwoodThree wrote:
    > > This isn't about the subject of this thread, but it got me curious.
    > >
    > > Are you suggesting that outsourcing to India means reduction in quality.
    > > I am asking this because what is believed is the other way, that is,
    > > outsourcing to India means better quality work. There was an article
    > > in eweek "time to debunk myth that indian programmers are better".
    > > I will post the link later. Don't have it now.

    >
    > I am going to go out on a limb and say worse quality work because I
    > can't understand them when I talk to them on the phone.


    A Global Survey of Software Development Practices

    http://ebusiness.mit.edu/research/papers/178_Cusumano_Intl_Comp.pdf

    Best,

    Richard
    Richard Torkar, May 5, 2004
    #19
  20. Sarah Tanembaum

    Ken Guest

    "Sarah Tanembaum" <> wrote in message news:<c78jfi$vomj$-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


    Depends.

    How much is your data worth?
    How much will downtime cost?
    How much will a commercial database cost?

    PostgreSQL is a really nice little database, and has a lot going for
    it:
    - easy to install, admin, and use
    - easy to port databases between PostgreSQL and other commercial
    databases
    - very high-quality implementation

    However, on the other side of the coin:
    - missing many of the high-end features needed in large data volumes
    like partitioning, clustering, parallelism, materialized views, query
    rewrite, etc.
    - missing many of the high-availabity features
    - missing lots of the various stuff: replication, etc

    Personally, when I've got a lot of value in my database I typically
    opt for a commercial offering. But there are those exceptional
    situations - like:
    - no budget
    - just want to prototype
    - it's read-only data and you can create a dozen small databases
    - the data isn't super-valuable
    Then in these cases - PostgreSQL is a nice little product, and I
    wouldn't hesitate to use it. Much better, btw than its primary
    competitor - MySQL with its limited, non-ansi sql, and amazing
    exception handling irregularities.


    kenfar
    Ken, May 5, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,240
    Phisiker
    May 13, 2009
  2. Wolfgang Keller

    XML <-> RDBMS Tool

    Wolfgang Keller, Jun 10, 2004, in forum: XML
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,753
    Gregory Vaughan
    Jun 10, 2004
  3. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    471
  4. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    969
    Andrew Koenig
    May 1, 2006
  5. Perl Lover

    moving binary data from one RDBMS to Other

    Perl Lover, Feb 6, 2008, in forum: Perl Misc
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    140
    Peter J. Holzer
    Feb 9, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page