Re: more anti-postgresql FUD

ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca (Andrew Sullivan) writes:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 02:50:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Some days I think database independence is a myth.
>
> On the day when you don't, please tell me what application you found
> where it isn't. I want to buy the developers a drink. Or maybe a
> bar.

You're sitting across the street from the local headquarters of the
vendor of just such an application.

Of course, they don't use foreign keys, triggers, dates are
represented as char(10), and validity checking is expected to be coded
into either (traditionally) transaction screens or (new technologies)
BAPIs (Business APIs). Really, the application was designed with IMS
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Management_System> in mind.

And *they* can afford to pay for a whole bar, once you pay the annual
licensing fee :-(.

Oh, and a cluster of IBM p570s would probably be enough to run a 20
user system :-(. [Actually, that's probably not *entirely* fair; I
once administered an R/3 system supporting ~30 users on a uniprocessor
DEC Alpha with 256MB of RAM, which by modern standards is pretty
pedestrian...]
--
(format nil "~S(at)~S" "cbbrowne" "linuxdatabases.info")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/sap.html
"Access to a COFF symbol table via ldtbread is even less abstract,
really sucks in general, and should be banned from earth."
-- SCSH 0.5.1 unix.c