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

Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft

From: Randolf Richardson <rr(at)8x(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-benchmarks(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft
Date: 2005-01-09 03:58:40
Message-ID: Xns95D8CCE81E473rr8xca@200.46.204.72 (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-benchmarks
"Randolf Richardson <rr(at)8x(dot)ca>" wrote in pgsql.benchmarks:

> "ycrevecoeur(at)nyc(dot)rr(dot)com" wrote in pgsql.benchmarks:
[sNip]
>> http://www.devx.com/dbzone/Article/20743
> 
>          I'll take a look at that.  Thanks for the link.

    	The only flaw I noticed when skimming over that comparison chart is it 
incorrectly indicates that MySQL is free and has no license costs.  This is 
not true for commercial use (I sent an eMail a few years ago to MySQL to 
confirm this after hearing and reading conflicting claims as such), and 
although this is better than Oracle's and Microsoft's offerings), it still 
isn't nearly as good as PostgreSQL's.

    	(I feel it's important to note also that while Oracle's and Microsoft's 
solutions have historically had costs ranging in 5 figures, MySQL has 
typically been ranging in a mere 3 figures, thus making it easily affordable 
for many small businesses.)

    	Overall, I'm happy with the information in that report, even though it 
is approximately 1 year old at this time.

In response to

pgsql-benchmarks by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-01-09 16:25:59
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft
Previous:From: Randolf RichardsonDate: 2005-01-09 03:20:15
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft

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