Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: "Brian Hurt" <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Date: 2008-12-14 04:07:40
Message-ID: 36e682920812132007me2a7063i8c6338a9aac99f51@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> My point is your signal to noise ratio is off. You very well could be
> correct (in fact I think you probably are) but it is irrelevant because
> all you do is hand wave.

I agree with that, which is why I did it and asked Oracle for
permission to publish it.  My goal was to point out that the benchmark
was far from being authoritative, repeatable, or well-understood and
that such things are almost baseless as a valid comparison.

> I am sure there are plenty of people in this
> community that would chew up and digest a valid benchmark from a
> Oracle/PostgreSQL expert but since we never see them, it is really hard
> to justify the work it would take to make significant architectural
> changes.

I likely did get carried away.  I hope to find time to write up my
findings along with everything needed to repeat the tests soon.

-Jonah

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Jonah H. HarrisDate: 2008-12-14 04:34:33
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2008-12-13 20:38:58
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group