Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 I've got a few customers using Postgresql, as an alternative for Oracle = because of cost. Most notable is pg/sql, which is alike pl/sql.=20 I wouldn't use it if needs to drive anything to the edge. It lacks the = ability to profile the time spend by the database on the database level = (at least: last time I looked, with pg 8.x) For "normal usage" (whatever that means), it's a viable alternative. Frits Hoogland http://fritshoogland.wordpress.com frits.hoogland@xxxxxxxxx +31 6 53569942 On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:31 AM, Nuno Souto <dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > kyle Hailey wrote,on my timestamp of 21/12/2012 4:05 AM: >=20 >> Postgres looks pretty cool to me. Nothing against Oracle. >> And a number of or clients are going Oracle -> Postgres so I'm keenly >> interested in the issues and feasibility. >=20 > We've been using Postgres for all our web-related dbs for years now. > Not only is it heaps cheaper than Oracle, it's reached a level = nowadays where it=20 > is quite usable. Regardless of the perorations of Stonebraker - who = has been=20 > remarkable silent since his last "take over the Oracle world" crusade = fizzled=20 > before it even started... - Postgres is a viable alternative. And it = actually=20 > can interface with Oracle quite well through the HS magic. > Not about to move our DW to it but a lot of other smaller stuff is = being=20 > seriously considered. >=20 > --=20 > Cheers > Nuno Souto > in overcast Sydney, Australia > dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxx > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l >=20 >=20 -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l