| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase |
| Date: | 2005-10-19 02:34:46 |
| Message-ID: | 16540.1129689286@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> If there smart enough to
> be buying innobase these days, you can bet that by now they have this stuff
> all straightened out.
No, that doesn't seem to follow ... if Oracle are spending their
resources to attack MySQL rather than us, the conclusion would be that
they are clearly still more informed by "the buzz" than technical merit.
What seems likely to me is that the Innobase purchase was a target
of opportunity --- they saw a chance to destroy a potential threat,
and took it. This proves nothing about their assessment of the
relative risks from us and MySQL ... only that they haven't yet
thought of an equally painless way to destroy us.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2005-10-19 02:36:43 | Re: Is Postgres comparable to MSSQL |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-10-19 02:28:49 | Re: Is Postgres comparable to MSSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Johan Wehtje | 2005-10-19 02:47:33 | Re: ANN: Rekall V2.4.0 |
| Previous Message | Douglas McNaught | 2005-10-19 00:09:29 | Re: PostgreSQL on Dual Processors, Dual-Core AMD Chips |