To: Randolf Richardson <rr@8x.ca>
Cc: pgsql-benchmarks@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Oracle vs. Microsoft 
In-reply-to: <Xns95D8C662EB006rr8xca@200.46.204.72> 
References: <Xns95D5894565E82rr8xca@200.46.204.72>
	<8533.1105221483@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<Xns95D8C662EB006rr8xca@200.46.204.72>
Comments: In-reply-to Randolf Richardson <rr@8x.ca>
	message dated "Sun, 09 Jan 2005 03:20:15 +0000"
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 11:25:59 -0500
Message-ID: <27468.1105287959@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Randolf Richardson <rr@8x.ca> writes:
> "tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us (Tom Lane)" wrote in pgsql.benchmarks:
>> Oracle prohibits their licensees from publishing independent benchmarks,
>> and I think the same is true for SQL Server.  So you won't find anything
>> unbiased.

>     	Do you happen to have links to their license agreements?

Google turns up the Oracle license right away:

http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/htdocs/distlic.html?/technology/software/tech/windows/odpnet/utilsoft.html

About halfway down in the text box you'll find a long list of "you may not"s:

You may not:
...
disclose results of any program benchmark tests without our prior consent;
...

I didn't find the text of the SQL Server license at microsoft.com, but
I didn't spend that much time looking either.

(In the spirit of fairness: Oracle's claimed reason for this restriction
is that they don't want to be bad-mouthed by people who don't know what
a reasonable database benchmark is.  I've seen enough bogus benchmarks
that I can sympathize with that.  Nonetheless, writing such a thing into
your license agreement *is* an admission of weakness.  If they had
confidence in their product they could let the free market figure out
which benchmarks mean something.)

			regards, tom lane