Re: is Oracle technically better than Ingres ?
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 15:36:25 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <ce5spo$h42$1_at_titan.btinternet.com>
"michael newport" <michaelnewport_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:63b202d.0407260216.34497df7_at_posting.google.com...
> Dear friends of database(s),
>
> After 13 years of Ingres, I am now using Oracle.
>
> But is Oracle technically better than Ingres.
>
> I would be much obliged if anyone could shed some light on the above
> question.
>
> It would also be helpful if you could 'please' keep your comments on a
> technical level.
Anything that implements SQL sucks. Your question therefore is about the degree of suckiness exhibited by each product. That's a tough one.
I like Ingres' ease of management. I like the fact that Ingres DDL is "transactional". I like the ease with which I can create (and destroy) a new Ingres database. I like the ease with which I can restore and recover an Ingres database. I also like the look of a lot of what is coming in r3.
On the other hand I like the way Oracle implements the READ COMMITTED isolation level.
As I implied, I'd rather not have to use either of them. But Ingres is the least bad IMO.
Roy Hann (rhann at rationalcommerce dot com)
Rational Commerce Ltd.
www.rationalcommerce.com
"Ingres development, tuning, and training experts"
Received on Tue Jul 27 2004 - 17:36:25 CEST