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

Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase

From: Chris Travers <chris(at)metatrontech(dot)com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org,Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>,Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase
Date: 2005-10-19 03:44:41
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-general
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:

> With no disrespect to PostgreSQL, MySQL has 100x our downloads and 
> installations...
> Oracle is simply going after by far the biggest open source database 
> player...
As I said,  Oracle demonstrated in 2000 that they had already singled 
MySQL out for special competitive treatement.  They did this by starting 
to offer db conversion utilities in order to help people migrate from 
MySQL to Oracle.  It is not about technical merit, it is about market 
share.  We could have the best RDBMS in the world but if we never get 
enough users to directly threaten them to the level that MS SQL Server 
or DB2 does, we are not the threat that they are, and we are not worth 
the time and expense that research, competitive strategizing, etc. would 
incur.  Therefore, I suspect that we are sort of on the back burner 
competitive strategy wise.  I.e. competition is on a project-by-project 
basis, and not coordinated as of yet.

There are some things on the horizon that could change this quite 
quickly, however:

1)  Sun is talking about packaging PostgreSQL and distributing it with 
Solaris.  This would bring us directly head to head with Oracle in a 
large number of potential installations.

2)  EnterpriseDB's efforts and awards may have attracted some 
attention.  This may reinforce the idea that we are a threat.

If this is the case, I bet that Oracle is probably pressuring Sun not to 
distribute PostgreSQL, and if they do anyway, we need to be concerned 
about the beginning of a high-level coordinated strategy targetting us 
specifically.  IMO, it is likely to start with one of two things:

1)  PostgreSQL to Oracle database conversion utilities released by 
Oracle (unlikely given extensible languages in PostgreSQL).
2)  Some sort of FUD campaign on the part of Oracle directed 
specifically at us and not tied to any specific project (fairly likely).

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers
Metatron Technology Consulting

Attachment: chris.vcf
Description: text/x-vcard (127 bytes)

In response to


pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Ron MayerDate: 2005-10-19 04:04:31
Subject: Re: Is Postgres comparable to MSSQL
Previous:From: Chris TraversDate: 2005-10-19 03:27:18
Subject: Re: More Slashdoting of Oracle vs. MySQL

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2005-10-19 04:09:41
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle buys Innobase
Previous:From: Tony CadutoDate: 2005-10-19 03:37:55
Subject: Re: A good client

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group