Обсуждение: Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?

http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html

'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
databases.'

Your thoughts?

--
Best regards,
Nikolay

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
>
> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> databases.'
>
> Your thoughts?

It probably has little impact on us.  It is useful perhaps for developer
servers at existing Oracle sites.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Hi,

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
>> to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
>> databases.'
>>
>> Your thoughts?
>
> It probably has little impact on us.  It is useful perhaps for developer
> servers at existing Oracle sites.

I hope one day Oracle will understand that "Free Software is not Free
Beer".

--
Devrim GUNDUZ
Kivi Bilişim Teknolojileri - http://www.kivi.com.tr
devrim~gunduz.org, devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
                       http://www.gunduz.org

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
 > http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
 > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
 >
 > 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
 > to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
 > databases.'
 >
 > Your thoughts?
Hm..... so now I can choose between a crippled binary-only oracle
version with no support, and
free-as-in-speech-and-beer  postgresql with excellent support on the
mailing list?

I think I'll stay with postgresql ;-)

Just image you are running a production system on oracle 10g express,
and reach
the 4gb limit.... It's already bad enough that some versions of ms
exchange limit your
datafile to 16gb - I don't want my database to do the same..... thanks...

greetings, Florian Pflug

Highlights from the license:  My thoughts.  This is not free, not even as
in beer.  Only good for a year.  No production use (which is more
restrictive than no commercial use. IANAL)  You have to pay when they
release it.

Quotes (with my bolding)

grants to you a no-charge trial license to use the pre-production beta
version of the Oracle Database Express Edition  software, documentation and
product training (the "Software")  provided to you by Oracle solely for
evaluation purposes until January 31, 2006.   Either party may terminate
the license for the Software at any time.  Upon termination, you shall
cease using the Software.

You may not use the Software for any commercial or production purpose.

You shall not: d) disclose results of any benchmark tests of any Software
to any third party without Oracle's prior written approval;

if and when the Software is released in production, you may acquire
licenses for the production version of the Software in accordance with
Oracle's then standard licensing and pricing terms and conditions (which,
at Oracle's sole discretion, may allow license of only some rather than all
of the features of the Software).

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/30/2005 01:24:52 PM:

> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
>
> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> databases.'
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Nikolay
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

I presume this thread was all brought about by the /. article
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/31/0659254&tid=221&tid=1
87

According to the link provided in the /. article
(http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html), Oracle has *proposed* a
free version by "year end".  Obviously this means that current download of
Oracle 10g Express Edition is *not yet available under a free license.*


-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of
Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:55 AM
To: nikolay@samokhvalov.com
Cc: Postgresql-General; pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?


Highlights from the license:  My thoughts.  This is not free, not even as
in beer.  Only good for a year.  No production use (which is more
restrictive than no commercial use. IANAL)  You have to pay when they
release it.

Quotes (with my bolding)

grants to you a no-charge trial license to use the pre-production beta
version of the Oracle Database Express Edition  software, documentation and
product training (the "Software")  provided to you by Oracle solely for
evaluation purposes until January 31, 2006.   Either party may terminate
the license for the Software at any time.  Upon termination, you shall
cease using the Software.

You may not use the Software for any commercial or production purpose.

You shall not: d) disclose results of any benchmark tests of any Software
to any third party without Oracle's prior written approval;

if and when the Software is released in production, you may acquire
licenses for the production version of the Software in accordance with
Oracle's then standard licensing and pricing terms and conditions (which,
at Oracle's sole discretion, may allow license of only some rather than all
of the features of the Software).

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/30/2005 01:24:52 PM:

> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
>
> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> databases.'
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Nikolay
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

I assume they are probably thinking of a free for non-commercial use,
which is great and all, but I assume that like the majority of folks
here, I am using postgres very much for commercial use, and not just
to run my personal website!  So I would say it's not a big deal,
infact it's not even a small deal, it's really nothing.

Alex.

On 10/31/05, Wes Williams <wes_williams@fcbonline.net> wrote:
> I presume this thread was all brought about by the /. article
> http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/31/0659254&tid=221&tid=1
> 87
>
> According to the link provided in the /. article
> (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html), Oracle has *proposed* a
> free version by "year end".  Obviously this means that current download of
> Oracle 10g Express Edition is *not yet available under a free license.*
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of
> Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:55 AM
> To: nikolay@samokhvalov.com
> Cc: Postgresql-General; pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?
>
>
> Highlights from the license:  My thoughts.  This is not free, not even as
> in beer.  Only good for a year.  No production use (which is more
> restrictive than no commercial use. IANAL)  You have to pay when they
> release it.
>
> Quotes (with my bolding)
>
> grants to you a no-charge trial license to use the pre-production beta
> version of the Oracle Database Express Edition  software, documentation and
> product training (the "Software")  provided to you by Oracle solely for
> evaluation purposes until January 31, 2006.   Either party may terminate
> the license for the Software at any time.  Upon termination, you shall
> cease using the Software.
>
> You may not use the Software for any commercial or production purpose.
>
> You shall not: d) disclose results of any benchmark tests of any Software
> to any third party without Oracle's prior written approval;
>
> if and when the Software is released in production, you may acquire
> licenses for the production version of the Software in accordance with
> Oracle's then standard licensing and pricing terms and conditions (which,
> at Oracle's sole discretion, may allow license of only some rather than all
> of the features of the Software).
>
> pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/30/2005 01:24:52 PM:
>
> > http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
> >
> > 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> > to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> > databases.'
> >
> > Your thoughts?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Nikolay
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> >        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> >        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

Perhaps I'm the only one to actually have read the article?

Oracle 10g Express Edition HAS been available for free for development
purposes with the previously posted and reviewed limited licenses for quite
some time now.

The news the zdnet.com article is reporting suggests Oracle WILL, by years
end, make the same software available for free - even in production and
commercial use.  The Oracle 10g Express Edition is still limited software by
means of hardware resources available to the database and a 4Gb [user] data
file limit.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Turner [mailto:armtuk@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 11:50 AM
To: Wes Williams
Cc: Postgresql-General; pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?


I assume they are probably thinking of a free for non-commercial use,
which is great and all, but I assume that like the majority of folks
here, I am using postgres very much for commercial use, and not just
to run my personal website!  So I would say it's not a big deal,
infact it's not even a small deal, it's really nothing.

Alex.

On 10/31/05, Wes Williams <wes_williams@fcbonline.net> wrote:
> I presume this thread was all brought about by the /. article
>
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/31/0659254&tid=221&tid=1
> 87
>
> According to the link provided in the /. article
> (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html), Oracle has *proposed* a
> free version by "year end".  Obviously this means that current download of
> Oracle 10g Express Edition is *not yet available under a free license.*
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of
> Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:55 AM
> To: nikolay@samokhvalov.com
> Cc: Postgresql-General; pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?
>
>
> Highlights from the license:  My thoughts.  This is not free, not even as
> in beer.  Only good for a year.  No production use (which is more
> restrictive than no commercial use. IANAL)  You have to pay when they
> release it.
>
> Quotes (with my bolding)
>
> grants to you a no-charge trial license to use the pre-production beta
> version of the Oracle Database Express Edition  software, documentation
and
> product training (the "Software")  provided to you by Oracle solely for
> evaluation purposes until January 31, 2006.   Either party may terminate
> the license for the Software at any time.  Upon termination, you shall
> cease using the Software.
>
> You may not use the Software for any commercial or production purpose.
>
> You shall not: d) disclose results of any benchmark tests of any Software
> to any third party without Oracle's prior written approval;
>
> if and when the Software is released in production, you may acquire
> licenses for the production version of the Software in accordance with
> Oracle's then standard licensing and pricing terms and conditions (which,
> at Oracle's sole discretion, may allow license of only some rather than
all
> of the features of the Software).
>
> pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/30/2005 01:24:52 PM:
>
> >
http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
> >
> > 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> > to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> > databases.'
> >
> > Your thoughts?
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Nikolay
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> >        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> >        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/31/2005 12:02:07 PM:

> Perhaps I'm the only one to actually have read the article?

Okay, yeah.  I went straight for the license.  I have now read the article
and agree with you.

wes_williams@fcbonline.net ("Wes Williams") writes:
> Perhaps I'm the only one to actually have read the article?
>
> Oracle 10g Express Edition HAS been available for free for development
> purposes with the previously posted and reviewed limited licenses for quite
> some time now.
>
> The news the zdnet.com article is reporting suggests Oracle WILL, by
> years end, make the same software available for free - even in
> production and commercial use.  The Oracle 10g Express Edition is
> still limited software by means of hardware resources available to
> the database and a 4Gb [user] data file limit.

And I daresay that this _can_ be an attractive thing to businesses,
supposing they offer a "production release," gratis.

There are plenty of "departmental applications" out there that involve
limited amounts of data which can fit into the 4GB restriction.

If Oracle provides a way to make it easy and cheap to deploy those, it
can drive a fair bit of future Oracle business.

The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
storage engine...
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "cbbrowne.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/languages.html
Twice five syllables
Plus seven can't say much but
That's haiku for you.

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/31/2005 01:14:57 PM:

<snip>
>
> And I daresay that this _can_ be an attractive thing to businesses,
> supposing they offer a "production release," gratis.
>
<snip>
True, as long as there is no license clause for future revocation of the
free license at the vendor's whim.  Kinda like the M$ clause in their
*open* XML standard.  Also, without source, deployments still are under
threat of discontinued support.  Kinda like Solaris 9 when Sun said they
didn't know whether the x86 version would be released.

Precisely the point I was trying to make sure everyone would understand
clearly.  Although I don't have a copy of Oracle's suspected new license, if
it is close to the existing license verbiage, even though it is "crippled"
by having certain hardware and software limits, those limits are per
physical server.  Therefore, anyone could simply deploy several
installations on different physical servers and have quite a collection of
Oracle databases.

One of Oracle's big selling points with this application is that it is very
painless to upgrade to their professional versions of their database by not
requiring ANY change to the existing database or applications - simply plug
your data in and go.

Judging from this, Oracle has decided to follow Microsoft's SQL Server's
free SQL program offer and also a lesson from your local crack dealer.  By
the way, I've tried both Microsoft's and Oracle's developer versions and
Oracle has a MUCH better product here at the moment.  Good luck even getting
SQL Server installed! You have to stumble upon the "right" beta for .Net 2.0
before the installer will proceed...it managed to find it in only 45
minutes!  Enough to make you kick yourself again for trying a Microsoft
product.  However, Oracle 10g Express Edition actually installs and performs
quite well.

All and all this is no "danger" to PostgreSQL's existence; though it may
slow uptake in very important markets.  I've never thought marketing was
Postgre's strong point...oddly enough, the product is.



-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Chris Browne
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 1:15 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?


And I daresay that this _can_ be an attractive thing to businesses,
supposing they offer a "production release," gratis.

There are plenty of "departmental applications" out there that involve
limited amounts of data which can fit into the 4GB restriction.

If Oracle provides a way to make it easy and cheap to deploy those, it
can drive a fair bit of future Oracle business.

The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
storage engine...
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "cbbrowne.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/languages.html
Twice five syllables
Plus seven can't say much but
That's haiku for you.

On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:

> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
> storage engine...

It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
for free? Remember, the "open source" aspect "can fix it yourself" isn't
really existent in the MySQL world, so those customers aren't really
looking for open source, they are looking for cheap or free. With the
control over InnoDB, Oracle has an influence on what XE is competing
against. Both offers compete with MS SQL Express as well, so they hit a
lot of small database competition with one stone.


Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
> On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
>> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
>> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
>> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
>> storage engine...

> It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
> will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
> for free?

People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
sales.

            regards, tom lane

Still, at least Oracle 10g provides for an easy GUI from which to configure
and perform imports and exports of data.  Some of use have need for a
database that can dump all data and accept another series of new data...only
to be dropped again in a few days.  The GUI tools make this MUCH easier -
especially when dealing with many different types of tables and data
formats.

    The GUI file import/export is one feature I would love to see next to
enhance pgAdmin III!



-----Original Message-----
People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
sales.

            regards, tom lane

Given both the naming of Oracle 10g Express and the timing of Oracle's
announcement, I think Oracle Express is more of a reaction to pressure
by Microsoft's SQL Server 2005 Express, due to be released Nov 7 but
actually shipped to developers this past Thursday.

I've been a DBA for _many_ years on Sybase, Oracle, SQL Server and
PostgreSQL.  From my perspective, Oracle requires a significant amount
of DBA expertise in order to use it, so although I do see Oracle Express
as a certain amount of threat to PostgreSQL, I don't think it's too
significant.  I think it's probably more designed to keep current Oracle
users from migrating to SQL Server or possibly to PostgreSQL.

MS SQL Server, on the other hand, while benefiting from a good DBA (like
all RDBMS's do), requires virtually no DBA expertise. (I'd never
consider using Oracle in any sort of embedded, bundled, DBA-less
environment, but I'd have no problem using either PostgreSQL or MS SQL
Server in those cases.)  So I do see SQL Server Express as more of a
threat to PostgreSQL, at least on the Windows platform.

I actually see both Oracle Express and SQL Server Express as being more
of a threat to MySQL rather than to PostgreSQL.  There are still MANY
many MS Access databases out there supporting departmental applications
or smaller web sites; I think many of these sites traditionally move to
MySQL.  Now they may be more likely to move to either Oracle Express or
SQL Server Express, especially in a corporate environment.

However, the other place where both these two (Oracle Express and SQL
Server Express) may hurt is not by taking current users away from
PostgreSQL but rather by taking away future users, and therefore a
certain amount of future growth.  Again, in a corporate environment, in
many cases it still takes a somewhat sizeable amount of persuasion to
convince "management" to go with any "free" solution, whereas going with
anything "commercial" is more just a matter of justifying the budget
numbers.  Thus it's _much_ less risky to recommend using Oracle Express
or SQL Server Express rather than PostgreSQL or MySQL.  It's the old
"you never get fired for buying IBM" all over again.  (Same goes for
consultants brought in to work on a new project, do a conversion of an
existing project or recommend a new platform: most of the time they'll
go with the safer solution rather than the riskier one -- there's always
one eye on future consulting business.)  No, this obviously won't always
be the case, but it's inevitable that at least some portion of the
projects that would have chosen PostgreSQL or MySQL in the past will now
stick with the "safe" solutions (at least career-wise) in the future.

- Bill

> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.h
> tml
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
>
> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a
> reaction to the growing competitive pressure from low-end
> open-source databases.'
>
> Your thoughts?
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Nikolay

If you read the FAQ, you will see:

Oracle has announced an entry-level, small footprint starter database called
Oracle Database 10g Express Edition
(Oracle Database XE), which is:
Free to download
Free to develop & deploy
Free to distribute (including ISVs)

Oracle Database XE is free for runtime usage with the following limitations:
Supports up to 4GB of user data (in addition to Oracle system data)
Single instance only of Oracle Database XE on any server
Only uses and executes on one processor in any server
Can use up to 1GB RAM

Pretty limited. This is mostly a way for people to get hooked with it, or
for existing Oracle users who need a few rinky-dink instances alongside
bigger ones.




On 10/31/05 11:50 AM, "Alex Turner" <armtuk@gmail.com> wrote:

> I assume they are probably thinking of a free for non-commercial use,
> which is great and all, but I assume that like the majority of folks
> here, I am using postgres very much for commercial use, and not just
> to run my personal website!  So I would say it's not a big deal,
> infact it's not even a small deal, it's really nothing.
>
> Alex.
>
> On 10/31/05, Wes Williams <wes_williams@fcbonline.net> wrote:
>> I presume this thread was all brought about by the /. article
>> http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/31/0659254&tid=221&tid=1
>> 87
>>
>> According to the link provided in the /. article
>> (http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html), Oracle has *proposed* a
>> free version by "year end".  Obviously this means that current download of
>> Oracle 10g Express Edition is *not yet available under a free license.*
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
>> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of
>> Richard_D_Levine@raytheon.com
>> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:55 AM
>> To: nikolay@samokhvalov.com
>> Cc: Postgresql-General; pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Oracle 10g Express - any danger for Postgres?
>>
>>
>> Highlights from the license:  My thoughts.  This is not free, not even as
>> in beer.  Only good for a year.  No production use (which is more
>> restrictive than no commercial use. IANAL)  You have to pay when they
>> release it.
>>
>> Quotes (with my bolding)
>>
>> grants to you a no-charge trial license to use the pre-production beta
>> version of the Oracle Database Express Edition  software, documentation and
>> product training (the "Software")  provided to you by Oracle solely for
>> evaluation purposes until January 31, 2006.   Either party may terminate
>> the license for the Software at any time.  Upon termination, you shall
>> cease using the Software.
>>
>> You may not use the Software for any commercial or production purpose.
>>
>> You shall not: d) disclose results of any benchmark tests of any Software
>> to any third party without Oracle's prior written approval;
>>
>> if and when the Software is released in production, you may acquire
>> licenses for the production version of the Software in accordance with
>> Oracle's then standard licensing and pricing terms and conditions (which,
>> at Oracle's sole discretion, may allow license of only some rather than all
>> of the features of the Software).
>>
>> pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 10/30/2005 01:24:52 PM:
>>
>>> http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
>>> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
>>>
>>> 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
>>> to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
>>> databases.'
>>>
>>> Your thoughts?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Nikolay
>>>
>>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>>>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>>>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

On 11/1/2005 8:49 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
>> On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
>>> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
>>> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
>>> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
>>> storage engine...
>
>> It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
>> will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
>> for free?
>
> People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
> get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
> ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
> practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
> really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
> sales.

With those limitations, there isn't much left to "configure". We are
talking about a 4GB maximum DB size. That is one default tablespace with
appropriate default extent sizes and pctinc. All the user needs to chose
is one of 3 canned config files for using 256, 512 or 1024 MB of RAM.


Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me.                                  #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #

On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 08:05, Wes Williams wrote:
> Still, at least Oracle 10g provides for an easy GUI from which to configure
> and perform imports and exports of data.  Some of use have need for a
> database that can dump all data and accept another series of new data...only
> to be dropped again in a few days.  The GUI tools make this MUCH easier -
> especially when dealing with many different types of tables and data
> formats.
>
>     The GUI file import/export is one feature I would love to see next to
> enhance pgAdmin III!

However, on the command line, the polarity is reversed (vague Star Trek
reference there) and PostgreSQL enjoys a MUCH richer and easier to use
set of utilities.  I find psql to be much much easier to drive than
oracle's SQL*PLus, which makes my head hurt.

And I can't use a GUI for at least half of what I work on for security
and networking reasons, so I have to have decent command line tools.

I know for many GUI folks the command line seems a cold and forboding
place, and god only knows that if you've ever been forced to use
Oracle's command line tools, the scarring may be permanent, but
honestly, do yourself a favor and spend an afternoon becoming familiar
with psql.  It's absolutely fantastic.  Far and away the best command
line interface of any database I've ever used, and one of the best
selling points of postgresql.

Between the \? listing of \ commands, and the \h listing of SQL
commands, it has all the documentation right there at your fingertips.

Scott Marlowe writes:
>However, on the command line, the polarity is reversed (vague Star Trek
>reference there)

reversing the polarity of the neutron flow: classic dr who reference,
actually

> and PostgreSQL enjoys a MUCH richer and easier to use
>set of utilities.  I find psql to be much much easier to drive than
>oracle's SQL*PLus, which makes my head hurt.

i have to use the informix dbaccess tool here at the day job a lot.
hate it. psql is so much nicer...

i do not have fond memories of SQL*Plus, either.

richard

tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us (Tom Lane) writes:

> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
>> On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
>>> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
>>> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
>>> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
>>> storage engine...
>
>> It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
>> will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
>> for free?
>
> People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
> get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
> ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
> practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
> really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
> sales.

You're probably right; if this release of Oracle is as complex to
install as has been typical, it won't chew up terribly much of the
"need an trivially easy to install database" market.

On the other hand, if they offer a reasonably "easy to install
default," it would indeed take some wind out of the sails (and sales;
love those homonyms) of Microsoft, where users are accustomed to a
whole lot of pointing and drooling.  They don't have to do anything
about MySQL AB this month; they already did that last month with the
InnoDB OY thing...
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "cbbrowne.com")
http://cbbrowne.com/info/linux.html
"If you want to talk with some experts about something, go to the bar
where they hang out, buy a round of beers, and they'll surely talk
your ear off, leaving you wiser than before.

If you, a stranger, show up at the bar, walk up to the table, and ask
them to fax you a position paper, they'll tell you to call their
office in the morning and ask for a rate sheet." -- Miguel Cruz

On 11/1/05, Welty, Richard <richard.welty@bankofamerica.com> wrote:
>
> Scott Marlowe writes:
> > and PostgreSQL enjoys a MUCH richer and easier to use
> >set of utilities.  I find psql to be much much easier to drive than
> >oracle's SQL*PLus, which makes my head hurt.
>
> i have to use the informix dbaccess tool here at the day job a lot.
> hate it. psql is so much nicer...
>
> i do not have fond memories of SQL*Plus, either.

Yes, sqlplus looks especially bad once you're used to banging around
in psql.  Although, I recently discovered rlwrap (a generic readline
wrapper) which makes sqlplus almost tolerable.  It's the best thing to
happen to sqlplus since... well, since "quit" I suppose.

http://www.dizwell.com/oracle/articles/cli_history.html

They actually did make _some_ strides. The installer actually works
consistently (knock on veneer-covered-pressboard), which is something I
haven't seen since the pre-8i text-mode installs...

Doesn't quite compare to the 5 minute untar/config/build/install/create
database cycle we're used to with PG however.

On 11/1/05 8:49 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
>> On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
>>> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
>>> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
>>> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
>>> storage engine...
>
>> It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
>> will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
>> for free?
>
> People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
> get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
> ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
> practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
> really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
> sales.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

--

Andrew Rawnsley
Chief Technology Officer
Investor Analytics, LLC
(740) 587-0114
http://www.investoranalytics.com

On 11/1/05, Andrew Rawnsley <andrew.rawnsley@investoranalytics.com> wrote:
>
> They actually did make _some_ strides. The installer actually works
> consistently (knock on veneer-covered-pressboard), which is something I
> haven't seen since the pre-8i text-mode installs...
>
> Doesn't quite compare to the 5 minute untar/config/build/install/create
> database cycle we're used to with PG however.
>
Or the ten second rpm -i...

I've only ever installed Oracle once, but I was offended by the
REQUIREMENT of a gui to install the thing.  I managed to just install
the X client and connect from another machine, but still, that seems
whack to me.  Plus I had to run a command line "installer" for the
particular Linux flavor that "prepared" the system for me to install
Oracle.  Yikes.  I don't see a single MySQL fanboi going through that
if their biggest beef about PostgreSQL (besides how PAINFULLY slow it
is ;^) is how horribly difficult it is to install and configure.

Having said all that, I will probably dabble in it since it fattens up
the resume...

> Yes, sqlplus looks especially bad once you're used to banging around
> in psql.  Although, I recently discovered rlwrap (a generic readline
> wrapper) which makes sqlplus almost tolerable.  It's the best thing to
> happen to sqlplus since... well, since "quit" I suppose.

I just wish pgsql had something similar to sqlplus's built in formatting tools
for output.  Being able to set titles, row lengths, and breaks made sqlplus a
very nice reporting tool.  A rather large majority of "reports" at my old job
consisted of sqlplus commands to set the format output, and a sql statement
redirected to our line printer.

I haven't used Oracle since the mid 90s so I don't have a working example but
a description of some of the commands can be found here

http://www.siue.edu/~dbock/cmis564/otext3.htm

Take Care,
James

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 01:25:31PM -0600, James Thompson wrote:
> > Yes, sqlplus looks especially bad once you're used to banging around
> > in psql.  Although, I recently discovered rlwrap (a generic readline
> > wrapper) which makes sqlplus almost tolerable.  It's the best thing to
> > happen to sqlplus since... well, since "quit" I suppose.
>
> I just wish pgsql had something similar to sqlplus's built in formatting tools
> for output.  Being able to set titles, row lengths, and breaks made sqlplus a
> very nice reporting tool.  A rather large majority of "reports" at my old job
> consisted of sqlplus commands to set the format output, and a sql statement
> redirected to our line printer.
>
> I haven't used Oracle since the mid 90s so I don't have a working example but
> a description of some of the commands can be found here
>
> http://www.siue.edu/~dbock/cmis564/otext3.htm

Given the choice, I'd *MUCH* rather have a good, easy-to-use CLI than a
reporting tool. I'm not a GUI person, so I always hate working with
Oracle and MSSQL in that regard. Of course db2's CLI is just horrid, but
luckily it's easy to just substitute your shell for it's editing
features, ie:

db2 'select * from table'
db2 'update ...'

Believe it or not it very quickly becomes second nature to wrap
everything in db2 '', so it's not nearly as bad as you'd think.

In any case, how much user demand is there for a reporting tool for
PostgreSQL? Either a seperate tool or better functionality in psql. My
guess is that this isn't something that interests most of the
developers, so the only way it's going to happen is if a lot of users
speak up and ask for it. Of course speaking up with patches is far
better.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant      jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software      http://pervasive.com    work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf       cell: 512-569-9461

> >
> > I haven't used Oracle since the mid 90s so I don't have a working example
> > but a description of some of the commands can be found here
> >
> > http://www.siue.edu/~dbock/cmis564/otext3.htm
>
> Given the choice, I'd *MUCH* rather have a good, easy-to-use CLI than a
> reporting tool.  I'm not a GUI person, so I always hate working with
> Oracle and MSSQL in that regard.

Exactly.  We had paid for support for SQL*Reports at that job but never used
it.  We either used those sqlplus commands listed in the above URL or a
Fortran(don't ask) program.

> In any case, how much user demand is there for a reporting tool for
> PostgreSQL? Either a seperate tool or better functionality in psql.

I'd like to see it in psql myself.

> Of course speaking up with patches is far better.

I simply don't have the time to throw at it :(  However now that I think about
it I believe one of the coders in our project (www.gnuenterprise.org) started
writing a tool a few years back based upon our db interfaces to provide a
cross db sqlplus like CLI.  I'll ask him how far he got into it.

On Wednesday 2005-11-02 13:11, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 01:25:31PM -0600, James Thompson wrote:
> > > Yes, sqlplus looks especially bad once you're used to banging around
> > > in psql.  Although, I recently discovered rlwrap (a generic readline
> > > wrapper) which makes sqlplus almost tolerable.  It's the best thing to
> > > happen to sqlplus since... well, since "quit" I suppose.
> >
> > I just wish pgsql had something similar to sqlplus's built in formatting
> > tools for output.  Being able to set titles, row lengths, and breaks made
> > sqlplus a very nice reporting tool.  A rather large majority of "reports"
> > at my old job consisted of sqlplus commands to set the format output, and
> > a sql statement redirected to our line printer.
> >
> > I haven't used Oracle since the mid 90s so I don't have a working example
> > but a description of some of the commands can be found here
> >
> > http://www.siue.edu/~dbock/cmis564/otext3.htm
>
> Given the choice, I'd *MUCH* rather have a good, easy-to-use CLI than a
> reporting tool. I'm not a GUI person, so I always hate working with
> Oracle and MSSQL in that regard. Of course db2's CLI is just horrid, but
> luckily it's easy to just substitute your shell for it's editing
> features, ie:
>
> db2 'select * from table'
> db2 'update ...'
>
> Believe it or not it very quickly becomes second nature to wrap
> everything in db2 '', so it's not nearly as bad as you'd think.
>
> In any case, how much user demand is there for a reporting tool for
> PostgreSQL? Either a seperate tool or better functionality in psql. My
> guess is that this isn't something that interests most of the
> developers, so the only way it's going to happen is if a lot of users
> speak up and ask for it. Of course speaking up with patches is far
> better.

I never really used SQL*Plus as a command line tool.  I tended to use it as a
weak SQL scripting language.

Granted report generators can't be part of core PostgreSQL, they are still a
critical part of any database workshop.

===========

A) Are there any FOSS SQL scripting tools that output data ready for reporting
(like SQR, but better)?

B) Are there any FOSS tools that will take data and build pretty output.

C) Are there any FOSS tools of type B that will take streaming input from some
tool of type A.

D) Are there any FOSS tools that combine both A and B into one low learning
curve package like Crystal Reports.

> ===========
>
> A) Are there any FOSS SQL scripting tools that output data ready for reporting
> (like SQR, but better)?

Open Office Base, OpenMFG, Jasper ...

>
> B) Are there any FOSS tools that will take data and build pretty output.

See above.

>
> C) Are there any FOSS tools of type B that will take streaming input from some
> tool of type A.

Unknown.

>
> D) Are there any FOSS tools that combine both A and B into one low learning
> curve package like Crystal Reports.

Open Office Base, Jasper...

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>                http://archives.postgresql.org
--
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Wed, Nov 02, 2005 at 05:26:56PM -0700, Trent Shipley wrote:
> I never really used SQL*Plus as a command line tool.  I tended to use it as a
> weak SQL scripting language.
>
> Granted report generators can't be part of core PostgreSQL, they are still a
> critical part of any database workshop.
>
> ===========
>
> A) Are there any FOSS SQL scripting tools that output data ready for reporting
> (like SQR, but better)?
>
> B) Are there any FOSS tools that will take data and build pretty output.
>
> C) Are there any FOSS tools of type B that will take streaming input from some
> tool of type A.
>
> D) Are there any FOSS tools that combine both A and B into one low learning
> curve package like Crystal Reports.

Not split up in that way, but Jasper Reports, OpenRPT and BIRT are
three reporting tools that have GUI designers available for them - I
believe all three are band-based engines. The learning curve isn't
entirely trivial, but it's certainly quite managable by end users.

(There are many, many others that don't have a GUI designer
 available. There's at least one on pgfoundry that explicitly supports
 postgresql. They usually seem to take XML as an input template and
 render to HTML or PDF.)

Cheers,
  Steve

> (There are many, many others that don't have a GUI designer
>  available. There's at least one on pgfoundry that explicitly supports
>  postgresql. They usually seem to take XML as an input template and
>  render to HTML or PDF.)

Our reports tool does this as well and works with most major databases.

From the URL at http://www.gnuenterprise.org/tools/reports/

"GNUe Reports is a platform and output-independent reporting system. It reads
an XML-based report definition and generates arbitrary XML output that can
further be translated into any format for which there is an adapter. GNUe
Reports currently has outputs for Text, HTML, Label Stock, and CSV -- with
PDF, Postscript, and Gnumeric/Excel formats in the works. Reports can output
directly to a file, as an email attachment, to a printer, or to a HylaFax
server. "

I've used gnue-reports to merge data from a postgresql db, merge it with an
RTF (or postscript) based template, and send the output to hylafax using the
fax number associated with the record.

It does have some support in our GUI designer tool but I've not tried it
recently.  Most my reporting needs are handled just as easily by a small app
written using our pdf table generator in our common library.  psql enhanced
with the sql*plus output control would eliminate a lot of the need for even
that at my current employer.

Since we started talking about sql*plus features another handy tool from
Oracle was SQL*Forms.  That is one item I do have a replacement for :)  Our
GNUe-Forms package was originally inspired by Oracle's old SQL*Forms package.
It also supports most major DBs and has addressed several shortcomings we
felt SQL*Forms had.

Re: the learning curve, I'd certainly include OpenRPT - http://openrpt.sourceforge.net

It's similar to Crystal or Access' report designer, and full rich GUI for all platforms (Win, Mac, Linux/BSD).

PDF documentation at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=132959&package_id=146756&release_id=321441

Cheers,
Ned


Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>===========
>>
>>A) Are there any FOSS SQL scripting tools that output data ready for reporting
>>(like SQR, but better)?
>
>
> Open Office Base, OpenMFG, Jasper ...
>
>
>>B) Are there any FOSS tools that will take data and build pretty output.
>
>
> See above.
>
>
>>C) Are there any FOSS tools of type B that will take streaming input from some
>>tool of type A.
>
>
> Unknown.
>
>
>>D) Are there any FOSS tools that combine both A and B into one low learning
>>curve package like Crystal Reports.
>
>
> Open Office Base, Jasper...
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
>
>
>
>>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>>
>>               http://archives.postgresql.org

FYI, since there has been so much discussion.  Have not reviewed license.
Also too busy to download.  --Rick

http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 11/02/2005 09:34:50 AM:

> On 11/1/05, Andrew Rawnsley <andrew.rawnsley@investoranalytics.com>
wrote:
> >
> > They actually did make _some_ strides. The installer actually works
> > consistently (knock on veneer-covered-pressboard), which is something I
> > haven't seen since the pre-8i text-mode installs...
> >
> > Doesn't quite compare to the 5 minute untar/config/build/install/create
> > database cycle we're used to with PG however.
> >
> Or the ten second rpm -i...
>
> I've only ever installed Oracle once, but I was offended by the
> REQUIREMENT of a gui to install the thing.  I managed to just install
> the X client and connect from another machine, but still, that seems
> whack to me.  Plus I had to run a command line "installer" for the
> particular Linux flavor that "prepared" the system for me to install
> Oracle.  Yikes.  I don't see a single MySQL fanboi going through that
> if their biggest beef about PostgreSQL (besides how PAINFULLY slow it
> is ;^) is how horribly difficult it is to install and configure.
>
> Having said all that, I will probably dabble in it since it fattens up
> the resume...
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Again, the previously provide link is NOT the version that is licensed free
for commercial production use!

The version in the headlines lately suggesting a free Oracle database for
professional and production use is NOT YET PUBLICLY AVAILABLE [expected by
year-end].  Still, the link below is likely to REPRESENT what we may expect
Oracle's new product may behave like.

On Nov. 1 I tried download below and it does have a very easy setup, and
some of the GUI management features are nice [all web-based].  Other than an
easy installer, compatibility to their expensive full database, and some GUI
maintenance features [data import anyone?] there is nothing remarkable about
this as compared to PostgreSQL except brand recognition and a large
marketing budget.  That said, I'd love to see what Postgre marketing could
do with just 10% of Oracles marketing budget to help build product
recognition.




-----Original Message-----
FYI, since there has been so much discussion.  Have not reviewed license.
Also too busy to download.  --Rick

http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html

I beg to differ.  Read this link.  New today.   Also announced to all
members of the OTN today.  --Rick

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/xe/index.html

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 11/03/2005 11:36:35 AM:

> Again, the previously provide link is NOT the version that is licensed
free
> for commercial production use!
<snip>

Go ahead and proceed through the click-throughs...this is still the same old
demo for development and testing only that they have had available for some
time.

This updated on Oct-28th only is for a newer
version(http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index
.html) of the same time-limited beta, non-production or commercial use,
licensed demo product.




-----Original Message-----
I beg to differ.  Read this link.  New today.   Also announced to all
members of the OTN today.  --Rick

http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/xe/index.html

pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 11/03/2005 11:36:35 AM:

> Again, the previously provide link is NOT the version that is licensed
free
> for commercial production use!
<snip>

I agree it is the same old software.  The point is that they are changing
the license.  Note the text from the download window:

"Note: The current license is for Beta testing purposes only. It does not
include terms, such as free redistribution and embedding (read the FAQ),
that will be available in the production release."

To me this means they are not yet telling what the final *free to
distribute* license says until the software comes out of beta.

Rick
pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 11/03/2005 01:08:01 PM:

> Go ahead and proceed through the click-throughs...this is still the same
old
> demo for development and testing only that they have had available for
some
> time.
>
> This updated on Oct-28th only is for a newer
>
version(http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index

> .html) of the same time-limited beta, non-production or commercial use,
> licensed demo product.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> I beg to differ.  Read this link.  New today.   Also announced to all
> members of the OTN today.  --Rick
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/database/xe/index.html
>
> pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org wrote on 11/03/2005 11:36:35 AM:
>
> > Again, the previously provide link is NOT the version that is licensed
> free
> > for commercial production use!
> <snip>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

On Monday 31 October 2005 13:12, Bill Bartlett wrote:
> However, the other place where both these two (Oracle Express and SQL
> Server Express) may hurt is not by taking current users away from
> PostgreSQL but rather by taking away future users, and therefore a
> certain amount of future growth.

I know of several places where postgresql got "in the door" because setting up
oracle servers for development was just too painful, so the developers set up
postgresql servers instead with the intent of porting it to oracle for
production use.

In fact at one of my previous employers, we took it to the next level when it
came time to luanch our product and the "oracle dba group" said the turn
around time to port the schema to oracle would be three weeks. At that point
I explained we could be running it in production on postgresql within a week
and the switch was made.  That's how the snowball effect starts, and you can
bet oracle is trying to nip these things in the bud.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

On 11/1/05, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes:
> > On 10/31/2005 1:14 PM, Chris Browne wrote:
> >> The fact that it appears "a joke" to people wanting to deploy big
> >> databases doesn't prevent it from taking a painful bite out of, oh,
> >> say, certain vendors that forgot to own their own transactional
> >> storage engine...
>
> > It's not a joke. It fits exactly the "small web application" needs. Who
> > will want to pay for a commercial MySQL license when they can run Oracle
> > for free?
>
> People who can't figure out how to configure Postgres are not likely to
> get far with Oracle ;-).  Unless Oracle has made some *huge* strides in
> ease of installation/administration with 10g, I see this making
> practically no dent in MySQL.  Or PG for that matter.  All they're
> really likely to accomplish is to cannibalize some of their own low-end
> sales.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
>        subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
>        message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
Well to be fair, Oracle 10g Express is easy to install and admin.
Basically you don't have to do any admin work and installing is as
hard as clicking next 3 or 4 times.
To me the only really nice thing Oracle has at this time is called
HTML DB that provides a semi easy development tool that hooks into
Oracle very easily. No need to write glue code such as connections and
state as the dev tool provides all this.

With that being said those of us who know better will not take that
over Postgresql, but it will buy Oracle more market share that is for
sure.

Bob

On Sunday 30 of October 2005 20:17, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> > http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/database/xe/index.html
> > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-5920796.html
> >
> > 'Oracle intends to release a free version of its database, a reaction
> > to the growing competitive pressure from low-end open-source
> > databases.'
> >
> > Your thoughts?
>
> It probably has little impact on us.  It is useful perhaps for developer
> servers at existing Oracle sites.

IMHO it is not against PostgreSQL/other OS DBs. It can be, but rather as a
side effect. The main competitor is free Sybase ASE (also Express
Edition :-)).

http://www.sybase.com/linuxpromo

Check the limitations. Sounds familiar?

Sybase ASE XE is a MSSQL competitor for low buget projects, ASE is still very
similar to Microsoft's SQL Server. Sybase also declares deep cooperation with
Novell (SuSE distribution). I don't think Oracle does not bother with this.

Regards,

Mariusz Czułada