Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:41:29 -0400
From: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] [ADMIN] Postgres VS Oracle
In-reply-to: <4677560E.902@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Cc: John Meyer <john.l.meyer@gmail.com>
Message-id: <200706191041.29998.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
References: <c50dbb0b0706180855v4b781f13m6e54c50aa3ab1dee@mail.gmail.com>
	<36e682920706182041v6c3c2989ya76875168c23f41c@mail.gmail.com>
	<4677560E.902@gmail.com>
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1

On Tuesday 19 June 2007 00:05, John Meyer wrote:
> Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> > On 6/18/07, John Meyer <john.l.meyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Then Oracle fears its users, which explains the "no-benchmark" policy,
> >> which I cannot see any PR honk being able to spin that in any way that
> >> doesn't make Oracle look like it's hiding its head in the sand.
> >
> > The humor I see in constant closed-minded presumptions is slowly fading.
>
> This isn't even a straight out slam at Oracle.  My degree comes in mass
> communications, and I cannot understand how anybody could shake the
> perception that Oracle is afraid of open, independent investigations of
> its programs.
> Let's take this at the most beneficial angle that we can, and that is
> that Oracle has seen too many people run their programs straight into
> the ground with some rather lousy benchmarking.  If that's the case,
> then the solution is not to bar each and every bench mark out there, it
> is to publish the methodologies to properly tune an Oracle installation.
> It is not to attempt to strangle conversation.

You do realize that not everyone who publishes a benchmark will actually 
*want* to do a fair comparison, right? 

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