| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Oracle buys Innobase |
| Date: | 2005-10-09 05:30:34 |
| Message-ID: | 3855.1128835834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> writes:
> When they announced at OSCON that MySQL 5.0 would have all of the
> features essential to support SAP R/3, that fit the best theories
> available as to why they took on "MaxDB", namely to figure out the
> minimal set of additions needed to get MySQL to be able to host R/3.
[ Trying to drag this thread back to something Postgres-related ;-) ]
Does anyone have a clear idea how far *we* are from being able to
support SAP?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Uwe C. Schroeder | 2005-10-09 05:50:10 | Re: Oracle buys Innobase |
| Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2005-10-09 04:07:08 | Re: Oracle buys Innobase |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Miles Keaton | 2005-10-09 05:36:33 | brain-teaser with CONSTRAINT - any SQL experts? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-09 05:05:50 | Re: possible bug : pg_dump does not include ALTER DATABASE SET search_path |