Re: Is Postgres comparable to MSSQL

On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 09:24:04PM -0400, Mitch Pirtle wrote:
> On 10/14/05, Andy Hester <ahester(at)galacticltd(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am a network/security guy not a dba.
>
> And you got internal applications based on MS SQL and most likely
> Exchange. I call this the "Armadillo Security Model" - hard on the
> outside, soft on the inside ;-)
>
> > One argument he makes repeatedly is that there is no database that is
> > enterprise worthy for a cost even comparable to MSSQL.
>
> There is a company here in Manhattan that is an up-and-coming
> financial services company. They were using MS SQL for their internal
> data processing, and ran into trouble running queries with 20 joins
> (or more, cannot remember the details). In short, the queries actually
> wouldn't run, and MS SQL wouldn't have anything to do with such
> nonsense...
>
> When they asked about an Open Source alternative, I answered
> "PostgreSQL" without any hesitation. They ran an evaluation (thanks to
> PostgreSQL being free to use) and not only learned that their monster
> joins went well, but overall performance (on the same hardware)
> improved.
>
> I'm now told that my advice may have shaved up to three months from
> their internal schedule as a result of their blossoming love fest with
> PostgreSQL. My all-time favorite quote from the CTO: "Every day I get
> a little more experience with PostgreSQL, and every day I get to
> liking it just a little bit more than yesterday."

I've got just two words on this:

Case Study :)

Cheers,
D (does an emoticon count as an extra word?)
--
David Fetter david(at)fetter(dot)org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!