Re: RE: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please

From: Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:26:35 -0600
Message-ID: <CAJvnOJZyCc_gM7jdMXseySEh-FBYToegBoR=2+gCt9kif8Tgmg_at_mail.gmail.com>

Interesting. I have been looking at PostgreSQL also. I was looking at replication from Oracle to PostgreSQL, this is a blog I wrote for my current employer on my proof of concept.

http://houseofbrick.com/oracle-to-postgressql-part-1/ http://houseofbrick.com/oracle-to-postgresql-part-2/

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, "Martin Preiß" <mtnpreiss_at_gmx.de> wrote:

> Mark,
> just an addition regarding the necessary space reorganization in postgres:
> the rdbms uses a multiversioning mechanism that stores different historic
> versions of a row in the heap table structure - and has to keep them
> available until the interested transactions are closed. As a result
> frequent physical reorganizations are necessary and they are done by the
> VACUUM command (or the auto_vacuum daemon):
> https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/postgresql-concurrency. That's
> certainly not as sophisticated as Oracles undo treatment - but it works
> (and has been around much longer than a sound MVCC in SQL Server for
> example).
>
> Having worked with postgres for some years (though much shorter and less
> intensive than with Oracle) I would say that it deserves the good
> reputation. The rdbms is very robust, shows a solid performance and
> conatins lots of features.
>
> Regards
>
> Martin Preiss
>
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 16. Februar 2016 um 17:07 Uhr
> *Von:* "Powell, Mark" <mark.powell2_at_hpe.com>
> *An:* ORACLE-L <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
> *Betreff:* RE: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please
>
> >> Maybe I'm wrong but I remember that happened with mysql before Oracle
> bought it. It was free and one day you had to pay for it. <<
>
>
>
> As far back as I can remember MySQL required a license for legal
> commercial use. It was only free for personal use if you read the
> license. The commercial license however was pretty cheap. I think it was
> a $500 flat fee.
>
>
>
> I have never used PostgreSQL but I have looked into it in the past. The
> product has a pretty good reputation. When I looked at it (years ago) I
> remember seeing one major drawback which had to do with how delete
> operations were handled. I cannot remember the details and it may have
> only applied to the index entries but rows were only logically deleted and
> you had to run maintenance to physically remove the data and make space
> available for reuse. This is likely no longer true.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:
> oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Juan Carlos Reyes Pacheco
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 9:37 AM
> *To:* ORACLE-L
> *Subject:* Re: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please
>
>
>
> I think the first problem is if it is going to become suddenly commercial,
> and that will be the same than equal for that is better to stay in Oracle,
> Maybe I'm wrong but I remember that happened with mysql before Oracle
> bought it. It was free and one day you had to pay for it.
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/about/press/faq/
> Q: What company owns PostgreSQL?
> A: None. We are an unincorporated association of volunteers and companies
> who share code under the PostgreSQL License. The PostgreSQL project
> involves a couple dozen companies who either support PostgreSQL
> contributors or directly contribute corporate projects to our repository.
> Some of our major corporate sponsors are on the sponsors page, and there
> are many more companies who contribute to the project in other ways.
> >I don't know if this will guarantee this will be always free, but at
> least this reduces the opssibility it becomes a commercial application, and
> will be free more time.
>
> Here is a quote about gardner and postgresql
> and I think this one of the business that offers support to postgresql
>
> http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/products/postgres-plus-advanced-server
>
>
> http://www.briefingsdirectblog.com/2009/06/postgresql-delivers-alternative-for.html
> Potential MySQL customers who are wary of the database's future under
> Oracle stewardship have a possible alternative in Postgres Plus, an open
> source alternative from EnterpriseDB, says that company’s CEO, Ed Boyajian.
> >I think it touches the problem that open sources database can become
> commercial database.
>
>
>
> 2016-02-16 9:17 GMT-04:00 Juan Carlos Reyes Pacheco <jcdrpllist_at_gmail.com
> >:
>
> Hello, please can some one share experience on postgres sql :)
>
>
> Now standard one has died and customers has to move to standard, I am
> curious about postgresql, specially afters it was recommended.
>
>
> about any hidden and misterious detail, for small business
>
>
> 1. Customers
>
> I understand they can pay support, so they can perceive as something
> serious for their companies.
>
>
> 2. Development
>
> I had seen is strong enough
>
>
>
> 3. vs Oracle standard edition
>
> I don't think there is too much to compare with enterprise, but maybe with
> standard
>
> Thank you very much for any comment :)
>
>
>
>
> -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

-- 
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Tue Feb 16 2016 - 19:26:35 CET