Re: Database market share 2004

Paul <paulsnewsgroups@hotmail.com> writes: > DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote: >>There is another important reason too: Instrumentation. If they are >>slow diagnosing why is a question of making guesses. That may be a >>reasonable approach when supporting a small non-commercial web site. >>It is a non-starter when talking terabytes and a requirement for 7x24. >>And then there's that little problem with government requirements >>around audits. They just aren't ready for prime-time. > > I have worked for a company (big player in its field) and had an > interview with another (a giant in its field) where they had systems > that ran on all of the major db's - SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and > Sybase. > > These db's contain(ed) neither triggers, SPs, PL/SQL, Transact SQL > or any other proprietary features of any of these db's. The only > coding that varied between the db's was how to get an > autoinc/generator/sequence value and that was in some sort of middle > layer. They did make use of DRI in the db creation scripts. > > I'm not saying that that's a good thing (in fact I'm appalled), but > the fact of the matter is that many companies pay for expensive db's > when in fact they are little more than bitbuckets. I think that it's > only a matter of time before the IT industry is going to wake up to > the reality that (at least as far as *_I_* have seen) very little of > the capacity of an Oracle or DB2 is actually being used and make the > switch to cheaper or Open Source db's. You may want Oracle's instrumentation for terabyte-sized DBs requiring plenty-o-nines' uptime, but there are a whole lot of instances of "departmental" applications out there which are quite amenable to the 'leap' to free software databases. For applications that are mostly used during office hours by the limited population of staff within a department, you don't get a lot of value out of the difference in licensing costs between Firebird or PostgreSQL and Oracle. And there are plenty of those sorts of applications around. -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org") http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html Rules of the Evil Overlord #78. "I will not tell my Legions of Terror "And he must be taken alive!" The command will be: ``And try to take him alive if it is reasonably practical.''" <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>;

You folks might want to get the online version of this magazine: http://www.eosj.com They are talking about many of the myths-n-shit you guys are propagating. This issue is one you won't want to miss. Chris Browne wrote: > Paul <paulsnewsgroups@hotmail.com> writes: > > DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote: > >>There is another important reason too: Instrumentation. If they are > >>slow diagnosing why is a question of making guesses. That may be a > >>reasonable approach when supporting a small non-commercial web site. > >>It is a non-starter when talking terabytes and a requirement for 7x24. > >>And then there's that little problem with government requirements > >>around audits. They just aren't ready for prime-time. > > > > I have worked for a company (big player in its field) and had an > > interview with another (a giant in its field) where they had systems > > that ran on all of the major db's - SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and > > Sybase. > > > > These db's contain(ed) neither triggers, SPs, PL/SQL, Transact SQL > > or any other proprietary features of any of these db's. The only > > coding that varied between the db's was how to get an > > autoinc/generator/sequence value and that was in some sort of middle > > layer. They did make use of DRI in the db creation scripts. > > > > I'm not saying that that's a good thing (in fact I'm appalled), but > > the fact of the matter is that many companies pay for expensive db's > > when in fact they are little more than bitbuckets. I think that it's > > only a matter of time before the IT industry is going to wake up to > > the reality that (at least as far as *_I_* have seen) very little of > > the capacity of an Oracle or DB2 is actually being used and make the > > switch to cheaper or Open Source db's. > > You may want Oracle's instrumentation for terabyte-sized DBs requiring > plenty-o-nines' uptime, but there are a whole lot of instances of > "departmental" applications out there which are quite amenable to the > 'leap' to free software databases. > > For applications that are mostly used during office hours by the > limited population of staff within a department, you don't get a lot > of value out of the difference in licensing costs between Firebird or > PostgreSQL and Oracle. > > And there are plenty of those sorts of applications around. > -- > (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org") > http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html > Rules of the Evil Overlord #78. "I will not tell my Legions of Terror > "And he must be taken alive!" The command will be: ``And try to take > him alive if it is reasonably practical.''" > <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>;

Data Goob wrote: > You folks might want to get the online version of this > magazine: > > http://www.eosj.com > > They are talking about many of the myths-n-shit you guys are > propagating. This issue is one you won't want to miss. It uses a bizzare page reader and does not work very well with Firefox. But they sure mention IE!!!! > > > > > Chris Browne wrote: > >>Paul <paulsnewsgroups@hotmail.com> writes: >> >>>DA Morgan <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote: >>> >>>>There is another important reason too: Instrumentation. If they are >>>>slow diagnosing why is a question of making guesses. That may be a >>>>reasonable approach when supporting a small non-commercial web site. >>>>It is a non-starter when talking terabytes and a requirement for 7x24. >>>>And then there's that little problem with government requirements >>>>around audits. They just aren't ready for prime-time. >>> >>>I have worked for a company (big player in its field) and had an >>>interview with another (a giant in its field) where they had systems >>>that ran on all of the major db's - SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and >>>Sybase. >>> >>>These db's contain(ed) neither triggers, SPs, PL/SQL, Transact SQL >>>or any other proprietary features of any of these db's. The only >>>coding that varied between the db's was how to get an >>>autoinc/generator/sequence value and that was in some sort of middle >>>layer. They did make use of DRI in the db creation scripts. >>> >>>I'm not saying that that's a good thing (in fact I'm appalled), but >>>the fact of the matter is that many companies pay for expensive db's >>>when in fact they are little more than bitbuckets. I think that it's >>>only a matter of time before the IT industry is going to wake up to >>>the reality that (at least as far as *_I_* have seen) very little of >>>the capacity of an Oracle or DB2 is actually being used and make the >>>switch to cheaper or Open Source db's. >> >>You may want Oracle's instrumentation for terabyte-sized DBs requiring >>plenty-o-nines' uptime, but there are a whole lot of instances of >>"departmental" applications out there which are quite amenable to the >>'leap' to free software databases. >> >>For applications that are mostly used during office hours by the >>limited population of staff within a department, you don't get a lot >>of value out of the difference in licensing costs between Firebird or >>PostgreSQL and Oracle. >> >>And there are plenty of those sorts of applications around. >>-- >>(format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org") >>http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html >>Rules of the Evil Overlord #78. "I will not tell my Legions of Terror >>"And he must be taken alive!" The command will be: ``And try to take >>him alive if it is reasonably practical.''" >><http://www.eviloverlord.com/>; > >

Data Goob wrote: >>For applications that are mostly used during office hours by the >>limited population of staff within a department, you don't get a lot >>of value out of the difference in licensing costs between Firebird or >>PostgreSQL and Oracle. What planet do you reside on? For those of us in the US. If those apps involve any medical information you MUST comply with HIPAA. If those apps involve any financial information including projections, assets, liabilities, inventories, etc. you MUST comply with Sarbanes Oxley. If you have more than 0 employees you MUST comply with the regulations published last Wednesday by the Federal Trade Commission. Ignore any of the above you your attorney will be looking for a retainer. Oh and that will be for criminal defense ... not civil litigation if you attract the wrong kind of attention. Do you think you can comply with those laws with Firebird? I can answer that for you. How abot PostgreSQL? Same answer. You'd better be thinking Oracle, DB2, or Informix or you had better not be lecturing others about their bad habits and criticizing others that break the law. So yes ... if you are storing your mother's cookie recipies I would think you'd be pretty safe in the open source databases to which you refer. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)