Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>
To: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase
Date: 2005-10-13 17:07:30
Message-ID: 20051013170730.GX23883@pervasive.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:52:58AM +0000, Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Jan Wieck wrote:
> >Oracle could even develop an exceptional interest in keeping PostgreSQL
> >alive as it's "future DB engineer forge".
>
> Looks like a good reason why Oracle should sponsor PostgreSQL heavily :-)

Heh. This gives me the thought that Oracle might be going after MySQL
for no other reason than to stop them from instilling really bad ideas
into people who then think they can design/develop against databases.
Somehow I can see Tom Kyte (of AskTom fame) doing a dance around his
office...
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2005-10-13 17:35:22 Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?
Previous Message Alex Turner 2005-10-13 17:01:40 Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0?

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2005-10-13 17:17:20 Re: Cluster/redundancy question
Previous Message Andrew Sullivan 2005-10-13 17:05:15 Re: Question about stored procedures