Re: Oracle Innobase Purchase Impacts MySQL.

Frank van Bortel <frank.van.bortel_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Paul wrote:

> > I'm sick to the back teeth of Oracle "people" talking about other
> > RDBMS's as "toy databases". That's like the users of a Ferrari or a
> > Lamborghini talking about the VW Beatle (or Bug or Cocinelle or
> > whatever it was called where you happen to live) as a "toy" car. It
> > may not have had the speed or facile aesthetics of an F/L, but it gets
> > the job done and doesn't need a specialist team of mechanics working
> > on it night and day to get the damn thing to work, constantly reparing
> > it, and needing to know off the top of their heads 3 million db
> > parameters for it to work at all in the first place.
 

> Who is unfair here?
> Who compared Firebird with the current version of Oracle?

It's all Daniel Morgan's fault 8-). If you follow the thread, the original post to which I replied was him talking about MS SQL Server using vast amounts of CPU. I was just reminding the group that in CPU terms (and RAM), Oracle is no slouch when it comes to using resources. Now, as to whether it's the best use of those resources....  

> And I loved my Beetle, but it's not the car I'd prefer now that I
> have a family of six.

And Daniel was comparing his big gas guzzler with another manufacturer's gas guzzling vapourware. Oracle afficionados may criticise their opponents for many things, but resource hogging is not one of them.

Paul...

-- 

plinehan __at__ yahoo __dot__ __com__

XP Pro, SP 2, 

Oracle, 9.2.0.1.0 (Enterprise Ed.)
Interbase 6.0.1.0;

When asking database related questions, please give other posters 
some clues, like operating system, version of db being used and DDL.
The exact text and/or number of error messages is useful (!= "it didn't work!").
Thanks.
 
Furthermore, as a courtesy to those who spend 
time analysing and attempting to help, please 
do not top post.