Re: Oracle and Postgresql

I agree with David's comment. The business I work for recently proposed a FOSS based solution for a client, but were told no FOSS solutions would be considered. We had a subcontractor offer a support contract for an application based on the same FOSS components, but with a support contract.

This was perfectly acceptable to our client, who now has a working solution, for which they pay annual maintenance, in return for a lack of internal liability.

For many businesses, risk avoidance is a core driver. What they require is someone else to blame if things go wrong, hence the companies making a living with contracts for Postgres support.

Cheers,

Brent Wood

Brent Wood
DBA/GIS consultant
NIWA, Wellington
New Zealand
>>> David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> 09/01/08 6:09 PM >>>
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:44:38PM -0400, Guy Rouillier wrote:
> M2Y wrote:
>>
>> Why most enterprises prefer Oracle than Postgres even though it is
>> free and has a decent enough user community.
>
> Databases are a critical part of many companies' business. I work
> for telecom company, and if we were to lose our databases, we'd be
> out of business, period. So, "free and decent enough" are not good
> enough. If you are going to bet your business on anything, you
> want to be as sure as possible that "it" is reliable and that you
> can expect quick action if "it" should break.

What they want to have is a huge entity they can blame when everything
goes wrong. They're not interested in the actual response times or
even in the much more important time-to-fix because once they've
blamed Oracle, they know the responsibility is no longer on their
shoulders.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate