I have been thinking about how people choose a free database, and what
they look for.

These are the items I think they consider, in this order.

How do we rate? Is the order correct? The question marks are areas I
don't know about.

Comments?
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other
Free
PostgreSQL DBs
Features = =
Speed - +
Reliabilty ? ?
Scalability + -
Standardization - +
Ease-of-Use + -
Support Tools + -
Extensibility + -

- --
Bruce Momjian
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us

------------------------------

End of hackers-digest V1 #483
*****************************

Search Discussions

  • Marc Howard Zuckman at Sep 14, 1997 at 12:43 am

    On Sat, 13 Sep 1997, Bruce Momjian wrote:

    I have been thinking about how people choose a free database, and what
    they look for.

    These are the items I think they consider, in this order.

    How do we rate? Is the order correct? The question marks are areas I
    don't know about.

    Comments?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other
    Free
    PostgreSQL DBs
    Features = =
    Speed - +
    Reliabilty ? ?
    Scalability + -
    Standardization - +
    Ease-of-Use + -
    Support Tools + -
    Extensibility + -

    --
    Bruce Momjian
    maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
    I think the question should be rephrased as How do people choose a
    database, omitting the word free. My impression is that
    less computer timid individuals are willing to take the
    risk of using a Non-Commercial product because
    1) They think they can work around the problems
    2) The application may not be a critical one
    3) They can use free software, if standard compliant,
    to prototype an application before selecting a commercial
    product.

    If you are going to consider why anyone would select a free product, I
    think you would have to rank price as #1.

    Personally, I initially chose to prototype with postgres about 1 year ago,
    hoping that the database would become more robust as my application
    became more demanding. I hoped that I could resort to a commercial
    database with relatively little pain if it was necessary. In addition,
    one year ago, relatively few vendors were marketing products for linux.

    I also considered mSQL at the time. There were some feature limitations
    of mSQL that led me to try postgres instead.

    from a general perspective, I would rank the importance of features
    as follows:

    1) Reliability
    2) Features
    3) Speed
    4) Support Tools

    Marc Zuckman
    marc@fallon.classyad.com

    _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
    _ Visit The Home and Condo MarketPlace _
    _ http://www.ClassyAd.com _
    _ _
    _ FREE basic property listings/advertisements and searches. _
    _ _
    _ Try our premium, yet inexpensive services for a real _
    _ selling or buying edge! _
    _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

    ------------------------------
  • Ross Johnson at Sep 14, 1997 at 1:58 am

    On Sat, 13 Sep 1997, Bruce Momjian wrote:

    I have been thinking about how people choose a free database, and what
    they look for.

    These are the items I think they consider, in this order.

    How do we rate? Is the order correct? The question marks are areas I
    don't know about.

    Comments?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other
    Free
    PostgreSQL DBs
    Features = =
    Speed - +
    Reliabilty ? ?
    Scalability + -
    Standardization - +
    Ease-of-Use + -
    Support Tools + -
    Extensibility + -
    When I started looking for a free database I recall that my first criteria
    were something like:-

    compatibility (with SQL, possibly ODBC etc as well in the future)
    reliability
    speed

    The compatibility was highest because I didn't want to have to rewrite
    code as new versions came out, or in case I had to change to another
    system if I found major problems with PostgreSQL. Also, if my prototype
    system worked, I had a better chance of getting other areas to use the
    system if it meshed well with their experience and existing systems.

    Exotic features were not so high, as long as there was enough standard SQL
    to build a system, ie. as long as complex queries could be built from a
    good and reliable set of simpler queries I didn't mind. Provided there
    were no fundamental and insurmountable barriers. For example, at the time,
    I looked at msql and found it had no locking of any kind, so that ruled it
    out, whereas I could use the table locking of PostgreSQL even though it
    was not ideal for me (I'd have preferred a finer level).

    I knew PostgreSQL's speed was not breaking records, but it was fast enough
    for my small project.

    As for reliability, there were some minor bugs that were of concern, but I
    could see that work was progressing solidly. So perhaps I would add
    "development progress" to the list. So my final list is probably:-

    compatibility (with SQL, possibly ODBC etc as well in the future)
    reliability
    development progress - quality and energy of the developers
    speed

    The last three items are strongly linked together.

    Incidently, I can't help noticing that this is also pretty much the same
    list I would use if I were buying a commercial product. Item three
    (development progress) would in that case translate broadly into
    "corporate image" (ie. what the advertising dollars buy).

    Regards.

    +----------------------+---+
    Ross Johnson | | E-Mail: rpj@ise.canberra.edu.au
    Info Sciences and Eng|___|
    University of Canberra | FAX: +61 6 2015227
    PO Box 1 |
    Belconnen ACT 2616 | WWW: http://willow.canberra.edu.au/~rpj/
    AUSTRALIA |
    +--------------------------+

    ------------------------------
  • Mattias Kregert at Sep 14, 1997 at 11:35 am

    Bruce Momjian wrote:
    How do we rate? Is the order correct? The question marks are areas
    I don't know about.
    I think "standardization" should be moved up to the top of the list.

    My list:

    1. standardization, reliablity, speed.
    2. features, scalability, extensibility.
    3. ease-of-use, support tools.

    Without standardization, PostgreSQL can not replace commercial
    alternatives. Then you miss the idea with SQL.

    Without reliability, it can not be used for any critical applications.
    You can use it for fun, but not for real applications.

    Without speed, it can not be used in the_real_world (tm).

    /* m */

    ------------------------------
  • James A. Hillyerd at Sep 14, 1997 at 6:46 pm

    On Sat, 13 Sep 1997, Bruce Momjian wrote:

    I have been thinking about how people choose a free database, and what
    they look for.

    These are the items I think they consider, in this order.

    How do we rate? Is the order correct? The question marks are areas I
    don't know about.

    Comments?
    I think that Reliability and Standardization are more important than
    Speed. If I'm going to use a database as a backend for a web site, I
    don't want the users seeing lots of DB errors. Standardization is
    important because I want to be able to prototype in PostgreSQL, then if
    money comes my way buy Oracle or Sybase for the project. But I suppose if
    we had speed, reliabilty and scalability, then I wouldn't need Oracle. =)

    - -james
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other
    Free
    PostgreSQL DBs
    Features = =
    Speed - +
    Reliabilty ? ?
    Scalability + -
    Standardization - +
    Ease-of-Use + -
    Support Tools + -
    Extensibility + -

    --
    Bruce Momjian
    maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
    [ James A. Hillyerd (JH2162) - james@blarg.net - Web Developer ]
    [ http://www.blarg.net/~james/ http://www.hyperglyphics.com/ ]
    [ 1024/B11C3751 CA 1C B3 A9 07 2F 57 C9 91 F4 73 F2 19 A4 C5 88 ]

    ------------------------------

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-hackers @
categoriespostgresql
postedSep 14, '97 at 12:07a
activeSep 14, '97 at 6:46p
posts5
users5
websitepostgresql.org...
irc#postgresql

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase