Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle

On Wednesday 11 October 2006 12:41, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 12:24:15PM +0200, Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
> > Press coverage, an interview with Neil Matthew and Richard Stones.
> >
> > http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid39_gci1222466,00.h
> >tml
>
> With friends like these...
>
> "In an emergency, having companies the size of Microsoft or Oracle to
> call on may significantly mitigate that risk."
>
> My experiences calling these outfits in an emergency have been a lot
> less than uniformly good, even with their top-cost levels of support.
> Blaming one of these outfits may save some manager's job, but that's
> not the same as actually having the emergency resolved promptly, or
> better still, not having it happen at all.
>
> "First, the ability to write functions and stored procedures is
> somewhat more limited than you would get with Oracle's PL/SQL or
> Sybase's T-SQL."
>
> I don't know which languages they were looking at, but it's hard to
> imagine how PL/SQL or T-SQL outdid PL/Perl, PL/PythonU, PL/Ruby,
> PL/sh, etc. from a flexibility perspective.
>

I'm not sure why people in this community are so quick to label anyone who is
less than glowing about postgresql as "the enemy", but it's really annoying.
Maybe these guys were thinking about things like the ability to return
multiple resultsets and/or the ability to do multiple transactions within a
stored procedure; both of which are functionality that Oracle and SQL Server
devotee's have been enjoying for years... (for the curious, see relevant
threads in the -hackers archives about implementation proposals to add these
features that as of yet have not gotten off the ground)

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL