Re: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please
From: David Green <thump_at_cosmiccooler.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:27:24 -0800
Message-Id: <8000B050-A644-4A48-AF04-6EDD3739DCE9_at_cosmiccooler.org>
You might find this company interesting:
>> 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
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:27:24 -0800
Message-Id: <8000B050-A644-4A48-AF04-6EDD3739DCE9_at_cosmiccooler.org>
You might find this company interesting:
I worked with them a lot years ago on product development.
Thanks
David
> On Feb 16, 2016, at 10:26 AM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com> wrote: > > 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-lReceived on Tue Feb 16 2016 - 20:27:24 CET