I've also found their on-demand online educational content convenient
for off-hours learning, useful for getting up to speed quickly, and
economical enough for out-of-pocket.
On 2/16/16 12:27, David Green wrote:
You might find this company interesting:
http://www.enterprisedb.com/
I worked with them a lot years ago on product development.
Thanks
David
On Feb 16, 2016, at 10:26 AM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Interesting. I have been looking at PostgreSQL also. I was looking at replication from Oracle to PostgreSQL, this is a blog I wrote for my current employer on my proof of concept.
http://houseofbrick.com/oracle-to-postgressql-part-1/
http://houseofbrick.com/oracle-to-postgresql-part-2/
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, "Martin Preiß" <mtnpreiss@xxxxxx <mailto:mtnpreiss@xxxxxx>> wrote:
Mark,
just an addition regarding the necessary space reorganization in
postgres: the rdbms uses a multiversioning mechanism that stores
different historic versions of a row in the heap table structure
- and has to keep them available until the interested
transactions are closed. As a result frequent physical
reorganizations are necessary and they are done by the VACUUM
command (or the auto_vacuum daemon):
https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/postgresql-concurrency.
That's certainly not as sophisticated as Oracles undo treatment -
but it works (and has been around much longer than a sound MVCC
in SQL Server for example).
Having worked with postgres for some years (though much shorter
and less intensive than with Oracle) I would say that it deserves
the good reputation. The rdbms is very robust, shows a solid
performance and conatins lots of features.
Regards
Martin Preiss
*Gesendet:* Dienstag, 16. Februar 2016 um 17:07 Uhr
*Von:* "Powell, Mark" <mark.powell2@xxxxxxx
<mailto:mark.powell2@xxxxxxx>>
*An:* ORACLE-L <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
*Betreff:* RE: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please
>> Maybe I'm wrong but I remember that happened with mysql before
Oracle bought it. It was free and one day you had to pay for it. <<
As far back as I can remember MySQL required a license for legal
commercial use. It was only free for personal use if you read
the license. The commercial license however was pretty cheap. I
think it was a $500 flat fee.
I have never used PostgreSQL but I have looked into it in the
past. The product has a pretty good reputation. When I looked
at it (years ago) I remember seeing one major drawback which had
to do with how delete operations were handled. I cannot remember
the details and it may have only applied to the index entries but
rows were only logically deleted and you had to run maintenance
to physically remove the data and make space available for
reuse. This is likely no longer true.
*From:*oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>] *On Behalf Of *Juan
Carlos Reyes Pacheco
*Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 9:37 AM
*To:* ORACLE-L
*Subject:* Re: Opinion for using PostgreSQL for production please
I think the first problem is if it is going to become suddenly
commercial, and that will be the same than equal for that is
better to stay in Oracle,
Maybe I'm wrong but I remember that happened with mysql before
Oracle bought it. It was free and one day you had to pay for it.
http://www.postgresql.org/about/press/faq/
Q: What company owns PostgreSQL?
A: None. We are an unincorporated association of volunteers and
companies who share code under the PostgreSQL License. The
PostgreSQL project involves a couple dozen companies who either
support PostgreSQL contributors or directly contribute corporate
projects to our repository. Some of our major corporate sponsors
are on the sponsors page, and there are many more companies who
contribute to the project in other ways.
>I don't know if this will guarantee this will be always free,
but at least this reduces the opssibility it becomes a commercial
application, and will be free more time.
Here is a quote about gardner and postgresql
and I think this one of the business that offers support to
postgresql
http://www.enterprisedb.com/products-services-training/products/postgres-plus-advanced-server
http://www.briefingsdirectblog.com/2009/06/postgresql-delivers-alternative-for.html
Potential MySQL customers who are wary of the database's future
under Oracle stewardship have a possible alternative in Postgres
Plus, an open source alternative from EnterpriseDB, says that
company’s CEO, Ed Boyajian.
>I think it touches the problem that open sources database can
become commercial database.
2016-02-16 9:17 GMT-04:00 Juan Carlos Reyes Pacheco
<jcdrpllist@xxxxxxxxx <http://jcdrpllist@xxxxxxxxx>>:
Hello, please can some one share experience on postgres sql :)
Now standard one has died and customers has to move to
standard, I am curious about postgresql, specially afters it
was recommended.
about any hidden and misterious detail, for small business
1. Customers
I understand they can pay support, so they can perceive as
something serious for their companies.
2. Development
I had seen is strong enough
3. vs Oracle standard edition
I don't think there is too much to compare with enterprise,
but maybe with standard
Thank you very much for any comment :)
