Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 344 posts

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#291

Post by mulmen »

pjmlp wrote: post #162
diebir wrote: post #100

Oracle is set to repeat the trajectory of SCO. Their primary product (the Oracle DB engine) is being displaced by the NoSQL and things like Postgres. The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad", and when forced, it ends up with Postgres anyway. Oracle used to survive in significant part by the support of the "database administrators" class. This layer of support is also becoming thinner…

Maybe for startups, on the enterprise space I am yet to see any customer move away from Oracle, SQL Server, DB2 and similar.

You should look harder. If you have Oracle experience then brush up on Postgres and cash in because specialization in just that specific migration can probably carry you into retirement.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#292

Post by jiqiren »

nine_k wrote: post #120
blub wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he is an asshole, but at least Larry Ellison didn't build a company to spy on half the planet like Page & Brin.

He failed to make half the world use his company's products, among other things. BTW I'd appreciate if you gave an example of a highly successful and ethically impeccable company.

Apple.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#293

Post by mulmen »

mattzito wrote: post #235
sb8244 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What hard problems are they solving that can't be solved with OSS today (tech problems)? I've heard things about their business apps division (business problems) and I can't say I particularly believe in their future there versus smaller focused companies.

So - I'm definitely not willing to go as far as the GP was with their statement, but Oracle's database technology is pretty amazing. I love postgres, Spark, NoSQL, etc. and think the progress they have made is amazing, but Oracle's database from a raw featureset is incredible. - Shared-something database clustering - true scale-out database clustering without writing sharding logic into your application, worrying abo…

You're absolutely right about the feature set of Oracle, it really is impressive. With every release Postgres gains more of the killer features of Oracle but there is still a long way to go.

In addition to your list above I would also like to mention partitioning. it is available now in Postgres but it is much weaker than what Oracle offers, although it does improve with every release. I would love to see row movement in Postgres.

Coming from an Oracle environment and now working primarily with Postgres I notice that Postgres is much nicer to developers where Oracle seems much more oriented to DBAs. Oracle has nice tools around things like partitioning and sharding but it doesn't even have a boolean datatype! Postgres has a full selection of datatypes, indexes and handy functions like row_to_json().

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#294

Post by pjmlp »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #290
secstate wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PostgresQL is an RDBMS and has increasingly been demonstrated as able to hold it's own against closed source rivals. I think the OPs tossing NOSQL in there was poor form, and I think "SQL engines" could be replaced with DBAs. The world still needs RDBMS and we desperately need people who understand them from an engineering perspective. But as an average app developer, I can scale my product to serve hundreds of thous…

What can Oracle do that Postgres can't, then? Can Oracle function with less RAM than Postgres?

Does Postgres already support distributed transactions across cluster nodes?

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#295

Post by noisy_boy »

Gonzih wrote: post #129
ghuntley wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fsharp |> welcomes all alienated Java veterans and newbies with open arms!

Is it still painful to do F-Sharp on Linux?

I played with F# on Linux last weekend - using Visual Studio Code. That + the plugins makes it workable - the development experience is not as smooth as I would want it to be:

- Paket keeps checking for new version on every build request with no way to switch that off to my knowledge

- There is no easy way to run the executable without dropping to the terminal (Ctrl+Shift+P -> fsharp doesn't show a "run current" or anything similar).

- The go-to-definition functionality doesn't work; highlighting and pressing f12 doesn't do anything (though hovering pointer on a function shows a tool-tip for what its worth).

The build works fine, syntax highlighting works, linter works well too. Not very sure if I should spend more effort to develop a full application (I want to build a REST api) because my target deployment platform is Linux and I'm not sure if F# on Linux is production ready or not (genuine concern and happy to get feedback on it).

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#296

Post by nikanj »

coolgeek wrote: post #237
diebir wrote: post #100

Oracle is set to repeat the trajectory of SCO. Their primary product (the Oracle DB engine) is being displaced by the NoSQL and things like Postgres. The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad", and when forced, it ends up with Postgres anyway. Oracle used to survive in significant part by the support of the "database administrators" class. This layer of support is also becoming thinner…

> The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad" I think that what you mean is: - they don't understand the relational model - they don't understand the tradeoffs of ACID vs BASE - they never bothered to actually learn SQL - they *think* that they have "big data" Don't get me wrong - there are compelling use cases for, and decent products for, every class of non-relational database. But the…

Most of these concepts are introduced only in the second year of a CS degree or later. Everyone knows that the truly gifted rockstar ninja founders drop out by christmas time first year.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#297

Post by pinpelipon »

coolgeek wrote: post #237
diebir wrote: post #100

Oracle is set to repeat the trajectory of SCO. Their primary product (the Oracle DB engine) is being displaced by the NoSQL and things like Postgres. The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad", and when forced, it ends up with Postgres anyway. Oracle used to survive in significant part by the support of the "database administrators" class. This layer of support is also becoming thinner…

> The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad" I think that what you mean is: - they don't understand the relational model - they don't understand the tradeoffs of ACID vs BASE - they never bothered to actually learn SQL - they *think* that they have "big data" Don't get me wrong - there are compelling use cases for, and decent products for, every class of non-relational database. But the…

To be fair, most of the developers raving about ACID I have met have had trouble naming other valid use cases requiring full ACID besides the "transferring money from an account to other" that nearly every course and school uses. The thing is, most of the applications just don't need that kind of guarantees, if they can at least detect (when using BASE) when something went wrong.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#298

Post by djeunneun »

ehsankia wrote: post #228
diebir wrote: post #100

Oracle is set to repeat the trajectory of SCO. Their primary product (the Oracle DB engine) is being displaced by the NoSQL and things like Postgres. The "next generation" of developers equals SQL engines with "old and bad", and when forced, it ends up with Postgres anyway. Oracle used to survive in significant part by the support of the "database administrators" class. This layer of support is also becoming thinner…

Basically, instead of innovating, or as the hip kids nowadays say, "pivoting", they just want to make easy money with stupid copyright claims and harmful tactics. I find this strategy extremely toxic and malicious. Google may do a lot of stupid things, and people often make fun of their "don't be evil" motto, but let's be honest, the shit Oracle keeps pulling here over and over is the real definition of evil. It's pu…

>don't be evil

Like censoring news articles which portraited a certain presidential candidate in a negative light for cash and goodies promised behind doors? Yeah, it diesn't get more evil than that.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#299

Post by diminish »

StreamBright wrote: post #289
mattzito wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So - I'm definitely not willing to go as far as the GP was with their statement, but Oracle's database technology is pretty amazing. I love postgres, Spark, NoSQL, etc. and think the progress they have made is amazing, but Oracle's database from a raw featureset is incredible. - Shared-something database clustering - true scale-out database clustering without writing sharding logic into your application, worrying abo…

Yes I agree with Oracle's database technology being amazing. It was born in an era when disk space was expensive and the only data storing mechanism that most developers know was transactional ACID SQL stores. However we are living in an era when disk is cheap, data volumes grew way beyond a single node capacity and we have a handful of different approaches when it comes to store data on disk. We also have much bette…

>> when disk space was expensive and

The biggest caveat for oracle and other proprietary solutions is the /dynamic/ licensing/pricing models having an effect on architecture based on disk, cpu and other paremeters.

With OSS solutions, postgres/mariadb etc I have the flexibility of deploying as many nodes, disks, cpu, machines as I want without thinking of how will effect the price, and without worrying of a sales organization tracking my use. That's why I don't worry about clustering, partitioning, linking and many other features lacking.

If I'm going to plan for 100M to 2B monthly active users for a growing organization Oracle/Ms SQL aren't an option at all. For small scale of up to 10K users, they seem to have a use case for "legacy" organizations.

Re: Oracle refuses to accept pro-Google “fair use” verdict in API battle

#300

Post by pinpelipon »

mattzito wrote: post #235
sb8244 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What hard problems are they solving that can't be solved with OSS today (tech problems)? I've heard things about their business apps division (business problems) and I can't say I particularly believe in their future there versus smaller focused companies.

So - I'm definitely not willing to go as far as the GP was with their statement, but Oracle's database technology is pretty amazing. I love postgres, Spark, NoSQL, etc. and think the progress they have made is amazing, but Oracle's database from a raw featureset is incredible. - Shared-something database clustering - true scale-out database clustering without writing sharding logic into your application, worrying abo…

There are two reasons several of my clients have chosen Oracle over Postgres.

#1: Training. Oracle does training very well. If need new DBAs in-house (for security reasons etc), they got huge array of options available. The most effective options are also insanely expensive. Once paid 400k€ to get two new DBAs. They became very good at it.

#2: Clustering. Postgres is nowhere near what Oracle offers. Even with the newest releases. What Oracle offers is real multi-master synchronized replication with proper distributed locks, low latency, and it's maintainable and easy to setup. Postgres has still 5-10 years to do before they will reach feature parity on today's Oracle.

Post reply on HN