Vince Vielhaber sez:
} On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
}
} > Sourceforge (VA Software), in a deal with IBM, is moving away from
} > PostgreSQL and Oracle and moving to use DB2 and IBM software for their
} > site:
} >
} > http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2120770,00.html
}
} What's next? MSSQL?
That's hardly fair. I'm a big fan of PostgreSQL, and I think it's great
software produced and supported by great people. I promoted it to my
company and we decided on it for our web application despite the lack of
support for it provided by our hosting service. (Please don't tell me about
hosting services that support PostgreSQL; I know, I don't care, we're
already committed.) Still, when I was working on research in grad school
and needed to show performance results, I ditched PostgreSQL and used DB2.
The advantage of PostgreSQL over DB2 is cost, and little else (you can
claim the community support is better, and you're probably right, but DB2
has commercial support). The advantages of DB2 over PostgreSQL are numerous
and varied, including performance, SQL compliance, SQL extensions,
first-class optimized ODBC and JDBC drivers, etc. They are comparable in
ease of installation and use (I've installed, administered, and used both
on various platforms), and DB2's administration tools are better.
When the cost becomes equivalent, such as when IBM offers DB2 free for
academic use or offers it in a deal to VA, DB2's disadvantages with respect
to PostgreSQL disappear. If I could get IBM to hand me (i.e. my company) a
commercial license to DB2 at no cost, I'd ditch PostgreSQL in an instant.
Note that this does not apply to all commercial DB software. I'd rather use
PostgreSQL than anything locked to a single platform (e.g. MSSQL), I've
heard horror stories about administering Oracle, and I don't know much of
anything about Informix or Sybase. I simply feel that DB2 is a superior
product among existing DB systems, commercial or otherwise, and PostgreSQL
doesn't come close.
} Vince.
--Greg