From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Randolf Richardson <rr(at)8x(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-benchmarks(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft |
Date: | 2005-01-09 16:25:59 |
Message-ID: | 27468.1105287959@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-benchmarks |
Randolf Richardson <rr(at)8x(dot)ca> writes:
> "tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane)" wrote in pgsql.benchmarks:
>> Oracle prohibits their licensees from publishing independent benchmarks,
>> and I think the same is true for SQL Server. So you won't find anything
>> unbiased.
> Do you happen to have links to their license agreements?
Google turns up the Oracle license right away:
About halfway down in the text box you'll find a long list of "you may not"s:
You may not:
...
disclose results of any program benchmark tests without our prior consent;
...
I didn't find the text of the SQL Server license at microsoft.com, but
I didn't spend that much time looking either.
(In the spirit of fairness: Oracle's claimed reason for this restriction
is that they don't want to be bad-mouthed by people who don't know what
a reasonable database benchmark is. I've seen enough bogus benchmarks
that I can sympathize with that. Nonetheless, writing such a thing into
your license agreement *is* an admission of weakness. If they had
confidence in their product they could let the free market figure out
which benchmarks mean something.)
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-09 16:30:54 | Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft |
Previous Message | Randolf Richardson | 2005-01-09 03:58:40 | Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft |