That's certainly an understandable position. Continuing with the assumption
that AIX, HP-UX, and Solaris all vanish. Docker is not Linux only. Docker on
windows is currently an option
Would I use it, probably not. I'm not a fan of windows in the first place.
Not relevant to the Oracle discussion, but not only does Microsoft have docker
images for MS SQL server, they beat Oracle to that punch.
The only thing I can say is that I'm glad Oracle is giving those with a more
progressive attitude more options. Conversely; it's also great they're not
changing things for people that want to wait for the next thing. The OUI is
still the OUI, nothing has changed there. It's my opinion that the less I see
it the better. For me it's wasted cycles I should spend making progress with
I've (both personally and within business) been focusing much less on Oracle in
the past few years. The decision is multifaceted, but one large reason is that
they've not been what I would call cloud friendly. (Obviously barring the
Oracle cloud which is a completely different discussion) It's not perfect, but
this is positive visible progress. I can already think of areas in which this
is a viable option for me. I'm watching with interest.
On Apr 21, 2017, at 11:39 PM, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/21/2017 09:56 AM, Ryan January wrote:
I do think it's fantastic that Oracle is trying to get up to date with
modern deployment practices, getting us freed from the archaic install
Well, that "archaic install process" is necessary if Oracle wants to support
things like AIX, Windows, HP-UX and last but certainly not least, Solaris.
Docker is a Linux-only platform. Sure, AIX, HP-UX and Solaris may vanish, but
I doubt that Windows is going anywhere soon. So let's place Docker where it
belongs: into the Linux world. The future of Docker also depends on what will
the Microsoft do with their database, which is coming to Linux, this time not
as an April fool's joke. If there is a database with more installed instances
than Oracle, that's SQL Server. SQL Server 2016 has a row level locking,
in-memory component which holds both row and column representation of the
table in memory, a technology pioneered by something called "Blu
Acceleration" almost a year before Oracle 12c, and the right to create
partitioned tables with no extra license costs and will be a formidable
competitor to Oracle, right from the start. If MS doesn't do Docker, that
will be a big snag for Docker. And it doesn't look like MS will do Docker. MS
chose Ubuntu as their foremost Linux platform and there is no SQL Server snap
available. For those who don't know, snappy is a Ubuntu version of Docker:
I was looking for a SQL Server snap, because I am running Ubuntu on my
desktop. As a matter of fact, this very message is written on Ubuntu desktop.
Any progress is great in my eyes.
It's questionable whether installing Oracle with Docker is a progress. One
size fits all installation will not be as easy to adjust to powerful machines
people usually use as DB servers. I know that Oracle is pushing Docker hard,
but Oracle doesn't have a Midas touch. Some things that Oracle has bought
have turned into mufflers: Hyperion, x10 and WebLogic are prime examples. I
guess it's a different kind of Midas touch.
I'm just looking at it very skeptically before I start talking about it more
with our devs. Is this just a PR spin, trying to get everyone excited about
It may well be the case. Amazon and Azure are far ahead of Oracle in the
cloud game. IBM Bluemix is a very serious competitor, too. I am not sure that
mixing Docker into the Oracle cloud offering will be such a revolution. It
remains to be seen. As opposed to many others on this list, I am adopting
wait and see attitude when Docker is in question. I was once berated on this
by being told that Docker is now a $1G venture. To answer that, I can only
remind people that Lehman Brothers was a $600G venture.
Tel: (347) 321-1217