Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Brian Hurt <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Date: 2008-12-13 19:28:52
Message-ID: 1229196532.7198.230.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 14:09 -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > Where is your patch?
>
> What's the point? I've had the same arguments and discussion for
> years and (per you and almost everyone else) anything significant has
> to be discussed on-list prior to acceptance. It's almost pointless to
> bring this stuff up anymore.

My point is your signal to noise ratio is off. You very well could be
correct (in fact I think you probably are) but it is irrelevant because
all you do is hand wave. I am sure there are plenty of people in this
community that would chew up and digest a valid benchmark from a
Oracle/PostgreSQL expert but since we never see them, it is really hard
to justify the work it would take to make significant architectural
changes.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
PostgreSQL
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Treat 2008-12-13 20:38:58 Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2008-12-13 19:09:25 Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle