Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-24 Thread Josh Berkus
Folks,

 What they don't say is whether that is a 50% speed up from the
 default settings or a 50% increase from a carefully hand tunes file.

AFAIT, most of their performance speed-up comes from two sources:
1) a carefully hand-tuned compile of Postgres using ICC, and
2) Improving on the default postgres.conf params.

BTW, they have set up 3 pgfoundry projects to contribute some-but-not-all 
of their improvements to the community, and have actively sought feedback 
from me, Bruce, Simon and others on how and what to contribute.  They also 
paid for Alvaro's work on shared locks.

So if that code has been slow in coming, that's due to their staff being 
overcommitted (it's a start-up).

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

   http://archives.postgresql.org


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-18 Thread Joshua D. Drake


I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly opaque about
progress, etc.  From the web site's statements it looks like they've written
a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50%
speed-up, but that's not new or unique fork-level functionality.

  


EnterpriseDB is a fork of PostgreSQL that contains a reasonable level of 
pl/SQL (Oracle) compatibility.
My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that they support packages, 
in, inout paramters etc.. in

the same syntactical way that Oracle does.

Joshua D. Drake



- Luke



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
  



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-18 Thread Luke Lonergan
Josh,

On 2/18/06 7:15 AM, Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 EnterpriseDB is a fork of PostgreSQL that contains a reasonable level of
 pl/SQL (Oracle) compatibility.
 My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that they support packages,
 in, inout paramters etc.. in
 the same syntactical way that Oracle does.

Thanks!

I figure they'll have to do quite a lot to make progress in their chosen
market, including:

- SQL*Net protocol compatibility
- Oracle Number datatype support
- ROWID unique row identifier
- Oracle Redo/Undo log format parsing and replay
- SQL Loader format support
- Oracle exp/imp format support

The broader Oracle enterprise market is used to a high level of integration
of Oracle instances across the enterprise, and their DBAs are highly trained
to use these features.

- Luke



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-18 Thread Luke Lonergan
Josh,

On 2/18/06 7:38 AM, Luke Lonergan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I figure they'll have to do quite a lot to make progress in their chosen
 market, including:
 
 - SQL*Net protocol compatibility
 - Oracle Number datatype support
 - ROWID unique row identifier
 - Oracle Redo/Undo log format parsing and replay
 - SQL Loader format support
 - Oracle exp/imp format support

I forgot one:
- Make sort ordering equivalent to Oracle (trailing blanks don't count, for
instance)

- Luke



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
   subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
   message can get through to the mailing list cleanly


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-16 Thread Luke Lonergan
Christoper,

On 2/15/06 11:14 PM, Christopher Kings-Lynne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Any comments on this?  Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that
 they don't make public?

I've noticed a lot of press lately is mentioning their name next to ingres
as an alternative to MySQL, so the MySQL folks might be feeling some
Postgres heat from their direction.

I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly opaque about
progress, etc.  From the web site's statements it looks like they've written
a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50%
speed-up, but that's not new or unique fork-level functionality.

- Luke



---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-16 Thread Rick Gigger
Any comments on this?  Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions  
that

they don't make public?


I've noticed a lot of press lately is mentioning their name next to  
ingres

as an alternative to MySQL, so the MySQL folks might be feeling some
Postgres heat from their direction.

I also wonder where their project is too - they seem publicly  
opaque about
progress, etc.  From the web site's statements it looks like  
they've written

a tool to tune the postgresql.conf file from which they claim a 50%
speed-up, but that's not new or unique fork-level functionality.


What they don't say is whether that is a 50% speed up from the  
default settings or a 50% increase from a carefully hand tunes file.


---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend


Re: [HACKERS] Blog post on EnterpriseDB...maybe off topic

2006-02-16 Thread Lukas Smith

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
http://www.flamingspork.com/blog/2006/02/16/enterprisedb-where-is-the-source/ 



Any comments on this?  Is he referring to EnterpriseDB extensions that 
they don't make public?


I think so. Trying to battle the perception that EnterpriseDB is an 
open source database. Seems though that little effort is made to 
understand the actual relationship between EnterpriseDB and PostGreSQL.


Looks like an attempt at pitting dual license GPL/closed source vs. 
proprietary BSD based.


regards,
Lukas

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

  http://archives.postgresql.org