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: justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com>
Cc: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Brian Hurt" <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Date: 2008-12-15 03:30:58
Message-ID: 36e682920812141930n228bc746h15291c4fc7494c23@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:17 PM, justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com> wrote:
> Where are you getting the $4 and $6 per transaction for PostgreSql.  i just
> search through this list

You won't see it there because none of the PG vendors see a reason to
spend the time and money officially benchmarking Postgres only for it
to place last.  Similar to Josh Berkus, I know where it ranks because
I (and several other EnterpriseDB developers) ran the tests to try and
get Postgres a TPC-C.

> Oracle only just in the last year dropped to below $1.00 it mixed bag from
> $3 to $52 (back on 2001)

Oracle hadn't run price/performance in awhile prior to that due to the
cost of the software.  Still, Microsoft has had it below $1 since
2005.

> First Step in testing and comparing is agree on a Standard that everyone can
> agree to.  Second step test the system without cheating which numerous
> software including Oracle, MS, and IBM have.

Cheating?  It's an industry standard benchmark.  And, for the record,
when I compared PG to Oracle on TPC-H, I didn't use Oracle's
additional features, I did a one-to-one comparison using the exact
same schema and indexes.

-Jonah

In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2008-12-15 03:47:48
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle
Previous:From: justinDate: 2008-12-15 03:17:56
Subject: Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle

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