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

Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

postgresql.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 238 posts

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#111

Post by aidos »

rantwasp wrote: post #16
phoe-krk wrote: post #3

Copying from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12115397/is-it-against-l... : The standard license ( http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/licenses/standard-license-... ) you agree to when you download software from the Oracle Technology Network (OTN) does state that you're not allowed to disclose benchmarks. You may not: > - disclose results of any program benchmark tests without our prior consent. I sadly suspect that…

people have known this things for quite a while (ie as as far as perf goes oracle is not worth it) and there is a reason why oracle includes that in the license. also, this comparison would not register as a proper “benchmark” as it’s not even close to how you would perform a proper benchmark. it’s more of a data point. on top of that there is the optics of suing a guy that wrote an email over some insane provision i…

I was once subjected to the oracle dB for an ill fated social network project. They purchased 2 servers and oracle licences for 8 cores along with coldfusion licences and then it turned out that a special driver was required to allow them to talk to each other - I managed to find one from a company in germany that only cost a couple of grand. But hey, they were going to be big and only enterprise solutions were on the table - despite my suggestions.

I’m not sure how much it all cost to get started in the end, but it was a lot of cash before development even started. Aside from that, it was not a fun experience developing for it. I mean, for the most part a relation dB is a relational dB, but there was something about working with oracle that just felt broken compared to postgres.

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#113

Post by aidos »

pas wrote: post #108
aidos wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are these benchmarks? Installation time (30m to create a dB! That can’t be right?!) doesn’t really feel like it falls under that umbrella.

No, that's about right. Oracle DB is seriously that bad.

But 2hrs to install!?! What world are we living in? Actually, I seem to recall it taking an age to install last time I dealt with it (2008).

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#114

Post by pstuart »

BossingAround wrote: post #107

We could sum up the post as: "I don't like Oracle DB because: - "Takes up more space - "Is slower to start/stop/init - "Is not free - "Has bugs" Umm... Sure, Oracle's slower to start/stop. Sure, it takes up more space. So what though? And then, "it has a lot of bugs and that causes downtime." Would be great to list some examples. All software has bugs. Why is this on the front page? Does it have any value what so eve…

You took time to criticize the post for being upvoted despite not being deep enough / giving enough examples.

It's likely upvoted because most of us in the industry have no love for Oracle and confirmation of that bias feels good.

Turnabout is fair play:

Why don't you give some examples of why a startup doing a greenfield project should use Oracle today?

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#115

Post by phoe-krk »

aidos wrote: post #105
phoe-krk wrote: post #3

Copying from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12115397/is-it-against-l... : The standard license ( http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/licenses/standard-license-... ) you agree to when you download software from the Oracle Technology Network (OTN) does state that you're not allowed to disclose benchmarks. You may not: > - disclose results of any program benchmark tests without our prior consent. I sadly suspect that…

Are these benchmarks? Installation time (30m to create a dB! That can’t be right?!) doesn’t really feel like it falls under that umbrella.

Yes. "How fast is the installation process for each database on the same hardware?"

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#116

Post by amenod »

scott_w wrote: post #53
amenod wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they decide to litigate, they might learn what a Streisand effect[0] is. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

> I doubt they care about the optics. I’ve never dealt with Oracle myself, yet even I’ve known about their reputation since before I joined the software industry.

Yes, but this looks like they are scared of benchmarks. Weird, right? :)

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#117

Post by BossingAround »

pstuart wrote: post #114
BossingAround wrote: post #107

We could sum up the post as: "I don't like Oracle DB because: - "Takes up more space - "Is slower to start/stop/init - "Is not free - "Has bugs" Umm... Sure, Oracle's slower to start/stop. Sure, it takes up more space. So what though? And then, "it has a lot of bugs and that causes downtime." Would be great to list some examples. All software has bugs. Why is this on the front page? Does it have any value what so eve…

You took time to criticize the post for being upvoted despite not being deep enough / giving enough examples. It's likely upvoted because most of us in the industry have no love for Oracle and confirmation of that bias feels good. Turnabout is fair play: Why don't you give some examples of why a startup doing a greenfield project should use Oracle today?

I am not in favor of Oracle. I don't care about Oracle.

That said, the original post is meaningless and yet on front page. That is what I'm writing against.

If all it takes for HNews to upvote an article is hatred of a company, that's a sad state to be in. Might as well get my free upvote with a simple isoraclestillshit.com website, eh?

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#118

Post by toomuchtodo »

jojobas wrote: post #73
ethbro wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Publish benchmarks as an LLC, then just go ahead and declare bankruptcy.

Better yet, publish as a Russian or Chinese resident. Disclose results to a (preferably not Oracle-using) tech newspaper on the condition of anonymity.

Publish your paper directly to SciHub anonymously.

Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL – A Comment

#119

Post by rantwasp »

aidos wrote: post #111
rantwasp wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people have known this things for quite a while (ie as as far as perf goes oracle is not worth it) and there is a reason why oracle includes that in the license. also, this comparison would not register as a proper “benchmark” as it’s not even close to how you would perform a proper benchmark. it’s more of a data point. on top of that there is the optics of suing a guy that wrote an email over some insane provision i…

I was once subjected to the oracle dB for an ill fated social network project. They purchased 2 servers and oracle licences for 8 cores along with coldfusion licences and then it turned out that a special driver was required to allow them to talk to each other - I managed to find one from a company in germany that only cost a couple of grand. But hey, they were going to be big and only enterprise solutions were on th…

if you think this is ridiculous you should see how it’s licensed for cloud instances and the shenanigans played around “virtual” cores.
Post reply on HN