| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Brian Hurt <bhurt(at)janestcapital(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle |
| Date: | 2008-12-13 19:28:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1229196532.7198.230.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 14:09 -0500, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:09 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > Where is your patch?
>
> What's the point? I've had the same arguments and discussion for
> years and (per you and almost everyone else) anything significant has
> to be discussed on-list prior to acceptance. It's almost pointless to
> bring this stuff up anymore.
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 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.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
PostgreSQL
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2008-12-13 20:38:58 | Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle |
| Previous Message | Jonah H. Harris | 2008-12-13 19:09:25 | Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle |