Re: SAPdb vs. Postgresql

John Wells wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> A client of mine asked me today how SAPdb (http://www.sapdb.org) compares
> with Postgresql.
>
> Anyone know? If you have had any experience with SAPdb, or have any
> pointers to benchmarks, comparisons, etc., I'd really appreciate it if you
> could pass them along.

I haven't used SAPdb so, with a very large grain of salt from
reading the SAPdb docs, I'd say:

Some SAPdb features not found in PostgreSQL:

1. Subtransactions
2. Recursive Roles
3. Synonyms
4. Automatic garbage collection
5. Stored procedures with exception handling

Some PostgreSQL features not found in SAPdb:

1. User-defined types
2. Multiversioning as concurrency control
3. Rules
4. User-defined functions in a large number of languages
5. Partial and functional indexes

Both have features such as:

1. Views
2. Subselects
3. Referential Integrity
4. Transactions
5. Support for large values
6. Triggers

I'm sure there's more in both camps, but that's a starting
point. As an example, the SAPdb docs specify updateable views
which PostgreSQL doesn't directly have but can be implemented
using RULEs, which SAPdb doesn't have. Likewise, SAPdb has
stored procedures, but I don't see user-defined functions.
PostgreSQL uses user-defined functions as the basis of stored
procedures. SAPdb has a numeric data type with 38 digits of
precision. PostgreSQL's numeric data type is of arbitrary
precision, altough I believe the backend is compiled with an
equally arbitrary limit of 100 digits. PostgreSQL's R.I. suffers
from concurrency problems. I don't know if SAPdb does. SAPdb
limits the use of the LONG data type in stored procedures,
whereas PostgreSQL doesn't. PostgreSQL's TOASTed values,
however, are limited to 1 gig, whereas the SABdb LONG is limited
to 2 gig. So even where the various fact sheets might say a
given feature has been implemented, the devil is in the details...

Hope that helps,

Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com