From: Lew <lew@lewscanon.nospam>
To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] [ADMIN] Postgres VS Oracle
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 09:36:02 -0400
Message-ID: <t7GdnTX4jIZZRurbnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@comcast.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4677560E.902@gmail.com>
References: <c50dbb0b0706180855v4b781f13m6e54c50aa3ab1dee@mail.gmail.com>
<36e682920706180910y519bc6a5h11e0ba56f45009ec@mail.gmail.com>
<4676B7C7.6020801@kostyrka.org>
<36e682920706181002i495f3fc3s2d55472e36a91b63@mail.gmail.com>
<4676BE31.6040701@commandprompt.com>
<op.tt4n3aldcigqcu@apollo13>
<4677472F.9020806@gmail.com>
<36e682920706182041v6c3c2989ya76875168c23f41c@mail.gmail.com>
<4677560E.902@gmail.com>
John Meyer wrote:
>>> make Oracle look like it's hiding its head in the sand.
One of my grammatical bugbears is the misuse of "its" and "it's". I got quite
the thrill from seeing their correct use both within the same phrase. Thank you.
Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>> The humor I see in constant closed-minded presumptions is slowly fading.
Instead of engaing in /ad hominem/ attack ("you're close-minded, therefore
your assertions are false" - /non sequitur/ - even close-minded assertions can
be true irrespective of the level of presumption and completely irrespective
of your attempt to spin them as jokes) why not address the claim on its merits?
John Meyer wrote:
> 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.
Not that anecdotal evidence constitutes proof, but I certainly perceive their
closed-mouthed and restrictive policy in that light. Why hide the facts
unless you have something to hide?
> 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.
Openness promotes progress and growth - it's true in accounting, legal
systems, software development and marketing, not to say everyday living.
Oracle would only benefit from an open conversation.
--
Lew
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: lew@lewscanon.nospam, pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] [PERFORM] [ADMIN] Postgres VS Oracle
In-Reply-To: <t7GdnTX4jIZZRurbnZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@comcast.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox