Re: Postgres vr.s Oracle

Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:17 PM, justin <justin(at)emproshunts(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Where are you getting the $4 and $6 per transaction for PostgreSql. i just
>> search through this list
>>
>
> You won't see it there because none of the PG vendors see a reason to
> spend the time and money officially benchmarking Postgres only for it
> to place last. Similar to Josh Berkus, I know where it ranks because
> I (and several other EnterpriseDB developers) ran the tests to try and
> get Postgres a TPC-C.
>
I would like to see them even if PostgreSql comes dead last.
>
>> Oracle only just in the last year dropped to below $1.00 it mixed bag from
>> $3 to $52 (back on 2001)
>>
>
> Oracle hadn't run price/performance in awhile prior to that due to the
> cost of the software. Still, Microsoft has had it below $1 since
> 2005.
>
>
Does that not prove the point Oracle is over price software compared to
the competition.

>> First Step in testing and comparing is agree on a Standard that everyone can
>> agree to. Second step test the system without cheating which numerous
>> software including Oracle, MS, and IBM have.
>>
>
> Cheating? It's an industry standard benchmark. And, for the record,
> when I compared PG to Oracle on TPC-H, I didn't use Oracle's
> additional features, I did a one-to-one comparison using the exact
> same schema and indexes.
>
> -Jonah
>

You can cheat at industry standards, I see it every day in the
electrical field where i spend most of time.

The only way to verify the results is duplicate the test and given these
servers cost from $100K to $10million its unlikely these test are
verified by a 3rd party running independent hardware. From where i come
from for result to be proven someone else must duplicate the results
independently with only instructions given by the original tester.