Re: [pgsql-advocacy] [PERFORM] Postgres VS Oracle

> > Depends? How many times are you going to antagonize the people that ask?
> As many times as necessary. Funny how the anti-proprietary-database
> arguments can continue forever and no one brings up the traditional
> RTFM-like response of, "hey, this was already discussed in thread XXX,
> read that before posting again."

Hey! I was about to! :)

As an Informix/DB2 admin I can tell you that those forums/lists get
pounded with the same kind of crap. My take: It is a bad policy, so
hound the vendor, and leave the rest of us alone. Convincing or not
convincing me isn't going to move the cause.

And now the rule of not cross-posting has been broken... commence the
downward spiral!

> > 1. It has *nothing* to do with anti-commercial. It is anti-proprietary
> > which is perfectly legitimate.
> As long as closed-mindedness is legitimate, sure.
> > 2. Oracle, Microsoft, and IBM have a "lot" to fear in the sense of a
> > database like PostgreSQL. We can compete in 90-95% of cases where people
> > would traditionally purchase a proprietary system for many, many
> > thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars.
> They may well have a lot to fear, but that doesn't mean they do;
> anything statement in that area is pure assumption.

Yep, and the 90-95% number is straight out-of-the-air. And I believe
that exactly 17 angels can dance on the head of a pin.

--
Adam Tauno Williams, Network & Systems Administrator
Consultant - http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com
Developer - http://www.opengroupware.org