From: | tom <tom(at)tacocat(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Karen Hill <karen_hill22(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
Date: | 2007-01-29 22:05:58 |
Message-ID: | 63EC4DAA-17D6-41EB-A463-510EE4FB05FA@tacocat.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
No.
Postgres does not represent an economic entity that can compete for $
$ with Oracle.
It's also not nearly as popular. And I mean that in a very pop-
culture way.
How long did it take Oracle to support Linux? Only when it became
"pop"ular to do so.
Who would they target anyways?
There's no one company....
On Jan 29, 2007, at 4:27 PM, Karen Hill wrote:
> I was just looking at all the upcoming features scheduled to make it
> into 8.3, and with all those goodies, wouldn't it make sense for this
> to be a 9.0 release instead of an 8.3? It looks like postgresql is
> rapidly catching up to oracle if 8.3 branch gets every feature
> scheduled for it.
>
> About the only big features pg 8.3 doesn't have is materialized views
> and RMAN..
>
> Now that PostgreSQL is getting so close to oracle functionality, is
> there any worry in the community that oracle will begin to target
> postgres like they're targeting mySQL?
>
> regards,
> karen
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
> QIDX:b07f206845737e76a8dbfbcfaae7837f
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2007-01-29 22:20:06 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
Previous Message | Karen Hill | 2007-01-29 21:27:19 | PostgreSQL 9.0 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2007-01-29 22:20:06 | Re: PostgreSQL 9.0 |
Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-01-29 22:04:30 | Re: Converting 7.x to 8.x |