Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.databases.oracle.server.] On 2004-03-26, Database Guy <dbguy101_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> sybrandb_at_yahoo.com wrote in message news:<a1d154f4.0403250419.48e16cce_at_posting.google.com>...
>> Ron <fdf_at_dmb.no> wrote in message news:<1064ungbvq55jd0_at_news.supernews.com>...
>> > I found an interesting article by Karen Southwick about Oracle's
>> > supposed "murky" (in her own words) future. Can someone counter her
>> > arguments.
>> >
>> > http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5072299.html
>> >
>> > Should I select Oracle or should I go with
>> >
>> > PostgreSQL.com (free and in my opinion, extremely reliable), MYSQL, MS
>> > SQL Server or DB2?
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>>
>> None of these products you mention come anywhere near the
>> feature set of Oracle.
>
> Not true - DB2 certainly does, for one. Probably as many bugs too.
>
>> why don't you go ahead and 'buy' one of the toys you mention?
>
> This is pure prejudice. PostgreSQL may lack the scalability of
> DB2/Oracle but is a stable and mature product; while even SQL Server

The lack of replication, clustering, hot backups & point in time recovery make Postgres a toy. It's simply not robust enough for critical deployments.

> is rather more than a "toy" these days. You talk of slander yet seem
> to be second to none in the bias department.

Postgres is suitable if your data is completely disposable.

-- 
The public has a right to free music. It's part of the bargain that
was originally made with musicians and publishers. It's time that the   |||
debate was shifted to reflect that. Robber Barons and their Toadies    / | \
are distracting us from the original facts of the situation.