Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PostgreSQL Inc. Open Sources Replication Solution

michael posted about 11 years ago | from the postgres-postgres dept.

Data Storage 383

Martin Marvinski writes "PostgreSQL Inc, the commercial company providing replication software and support for PostgreSQL, open sourced their eRServer replication product. This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle as the de facto RDBMS standard. More information can be found on PostgreSQL's website."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Oh no! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823065)

Oh no! Are the replicators here?!


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823495)

PBS Show This Friday on Offshoring

This Friday, August 29th, PBS will air an important one hour show on outsourcing work to foreign countries.

In the midst of steep economic recession and skyrocketing unemployment rates, more and more major American companies are cutting costs by outsourcing work [] to foreign countries. Now, these exported jobs are taking their toll on college-educated and skilled professional workforce. With experts estimating that 3.3 million white-collar jobs will be sent overseas by 2015, is America's middle class being hollowed out?

On Friday, August 29, 2003 at 9PM PBS NOW [] goes to India where the country's skilled and educated workforce is answering customer and financial service calls and taking over technology positions for some of America's biggest corporations while millions of Americans search for jobs at home.

Check your local listings [] !

Excellent (1)

Czmyt (689032) | about 11 years ago | (#6823075)

That will be an excellent and much appreciated addition to this excellent database. FP

Re:Excellent (4, Informative)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 11 years ago | (#6823179)

I've been waiting anxiously for this. Postgres will definately be running my startup now... lack of replication was the only thing holding Postgres back. Wonder how long it will take for this to migrate to debs stable branch...

Re:Excellent (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823438)

> Wonder how long it will take for this to migrate to debs stable branch...

About seven years.

Re:Excellent (0)

noisehole (300584) | about 11 years ago | (#6823497)

20 GOTO 10

Postgre sucks! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823078)

Use MySQL! Who cares if it doesn't support transactions, corrupts at every chance, is not scalable, and a resource hog! It is your duty to use MySQL!

Re:Postgre sucks! (5, Interesting)

delta407 (518868) | about 11 years ago | (#6823172)

Troll, but I'll bite.

it doesn't support transactions
Ever heard of InnoDB [] ? MySQL lets you choose -- on a table-by-table basis -- exactly what parts of your application need to support transactions, foreign keys, etc.
corrupts at every chance
Odd, neither Slashdot [] nor Yahoo! Finance [] seem to be having corruption problems...
is not scalable
Adding extra memory, CPUs, or slave servers obviously has no impact on server performance. (Yes, replication is... clumsy, at best, but depending on the application, it can work quite well.)
a resource hog
Compared to Postgres?

Re:Postgre sucks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823239)

It's amazing what you fanboys will say, regardless of whether it's true or not.

Re:Postgre sucks! (4, Informative)

DAldredge (2353) | about 11 years ago | (#6823261)

InnoDB Hot Backup is a tool which allows you to backup a running InnoDB database without setting any locks or disturbing normal database processing. You get a consistent copy of your database, as if the copy were taken at a precise point in time. InnoDB Hot Backup is also the ideal method of setting up new slaves if you use the MySQL replication on InnoDB tables.

For how many server computers you want to order an evaluation copy, or 1-year licenses (390 euros or 450 US dollars each), or perpetual licenses (990 euros or 1150 US dollars each); discounts are available for large volume orders.

This is from

Re:Postgre sucks! (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823509)

I had a bit of a giggle when I read the parent but seriously guys (those replying to him/her). and this will seem as a troll but I don't care.

Have you actually used MySQL and tried to break it? The damn thing is hopeless in comparison to PostgreSQL, Oracle and even SQL Server:

InnoDB transactions don't include the DDL so your create table/index etc... WON'T roll back when you cancel a transaction - so really mysql transactions are for inserts, updates and deletes ONLY. Don't give me this crap about innodb being the be all and end all..

it will not perform validation checking on dates correctly, inserting 29/02/2003 works! It allows you to insert 00/00/0000 when that doesn't even EXIST!

it doesn't obey the datatypes you tell it to use and will happily insert 100.00 into a numeric(4,2) field but no -100.. why? cause the programmers use an extra bit for signing and instead you'll wind up with -99.99. This is correct (although your data is fucked) but whats with 100 being legal?? It will even allow you to insert a CHARACTER into a numeric field WITHOUT complaints - I want my database to tell me when something is wrong and enforce my business rules.

You should always try and build as much of your rules into the db app server - thats what it is - an application server, don't put all your logic in your client app. I'm not surprised that Slashdot is fine and all - all the logic is probably in the perl.

I'm sorry for the trollish tone but I could NEVER recommend someone use MySQL. Now MaxDB might be different and I'm all for it if it is but lets just hope it doesn't inherit to much from the MySQL codebase...

Re:Postgre sucks! (1)

cca93014 (466820) | about 11 years ago | (#6823523)

troll troll troll.

Er, well, I have mysql installed on my windows dev machine and it's scurrently consuming 2.848 MB. I suppose that doesn't fit into 640k, but there you go.


#1 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823080)



Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823081)

The trolls of slashdot support the protest against software patents. If odsn got sued because of patented code in slashdot, you have anywhere to troll. SO PROTEST!

6th pr0st33Z! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823083)


E1gth pr0st!@@# (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823090)

Suck it down, my coon-dogs.

YOU FAIL IT! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823101)

YOU HAVE FAILED! You got the 7th pr0st33Z! I got the 6th, and I called it. You didn't. u r teh sux.

Love Always,
News For Turds


Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823103)

Instead of posting the obligatory troll about how postgres sql sucks, this post is closed in protest of software patents. If postgresql got sued because of patented database techniques, you wouldn't have an open source database to troll about, so PROTEST!

The defacto standard (5, Insightful)

jon323456 (194737) | about 11 years ago | (#6823115)

There is an enormous distance between "viable alternative" and "defacto standard" and the path between them is not paved with features.

Re:The defacto standard (5, Insightful)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823145)

Very true...

I have had experience with both Oracle and Postgres, and I would never go back to Oracle...

Maybe I was not using all of it's "Enterprise features", but I find Postgres to be fast, and reliable... Plus I am not constantly bombarded with Oracle spam, like I was when I registered for an oracle devnet account...

Re:The defacto standard (4, Informative)

sporty (27564) | about 11 years ago | (#6823386)

Yeah, but there are irritants to postgres as well.

No source code packages. You can't create a library, like you would in oracle.

When you have an sql error, it tells you the char it occured at, and not much more. Quite annoying if oyu miss a , in a multiline query and have to paste it back.

You can't network two instances so to speak. You can't say.. "select * from slashdot.messages, freshmeat.list where..." Bloody useful for running remote queries over a dedicated line, w/o dump-replicationg stuff.

Not easy to see, verbatim, what queries are running. Well, nothing i've seen so far. :\

But you know what, I use it, and I like it. 'cuz it doesn't require a java installer and it is simple. But it doesn't hold a light to oracle in some ways :)

Re:The defacto standard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823405)

You can do this since PostgreSQL 7.3, and some care when creating databases/schemas.

Re:The defacto standard (2, Insightful)

Sir Runcible Spoon (143210) | about 11 years ago | (#6823656)

And there is no Java Stored Procedures/SQLJ yet.

Not important to some, but it is important to those of us that support the same product across many RDBMS.

Get the FULL POTENTIAL from Postgres! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823135)

Buy your SCO Intellectual Property License for Linux today.

Morons are closing! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823138)

The usual psot about robbIEs postblock device has been closed. If things were pateNTdead, you wouldn't be able to postblock, SO PROTEST!

I've never understood (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823153)

Who is robbIE? And what is the deal with that guy?

Good Thing(tm) (4, Interesting)

mr_stark (242856) | about 11 years ago | (#6823148)

While this is a good thing, pseduo replication is possible at the application layer. Think using PHP to squirt a table in one DB into anther one.

Now that Postgress can replicate at DB level other, more interesting things are possible. You can use replication for both failover and performance clustering.

Re:Good Thing(tm) (1)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823159)

You can keep your spam blocklist [] running now ;)

Re:Good Thing(tm) (5, Insightful)

msgmonkey (599753) | about 11 years ago | (#6823186)

Implementing replication at the application layer is about as much fun as implementing table locking at that layer.

Re:Good Thing(tm) (1)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | about 11 years ago | (#6823322)

Think using PHP to squirt a table in one DB into anther one.

Oh man, that is sooooo cheating.

Re:Good Thing(tm) (5, Informative)

TechnoVooDooDaddy (470187) | about 11 years ago | (#6823403)

clearly the poster does not understand the intricacies of replication in a real-time environment.

you can not pull the data out of table and stuff it into another table under even a reasonable workload.

but i understand this is slashdot and technical relevance need not necessarily apply.

Re:Good Thing(tm) (2, Informative)

bigjocker (113512) | about 11 years ago | (#6823446)

In most cases application level replication does not work. When you replicate a DB you need an exact copy, not only the data or table structures, but stored procedures, functions, foreign keys, triggers, synonyms, etc.

In my day job we use Oracle because

1.- Management is using the Powered by Oracle (or something like that) to sell the products to our clients
2.- Replication

But in my freelance company we use PostgreSQL exclusively and have experienced the burden of not having a reliable replication software. This is Good News for us small shops.

mySQL gets more publicity (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823149)

Check More companies look for people with mySQL experiences. Check the book stores. You will see more books about mySQL. Even though PostgreSQL has more features and is more promising and powerful, mySQL gets more publicity. This means that mySQL will be the open source database that will replace most commercial databases. It's sad but true.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823171)

I guess I'm better off pushing for mySQL than for PostgreSQL at my work. I don't want people to tell me in three years why I used an unpopular open source database. mySQL is simply more popular and its popularity is growing faster.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823226)

I heard that mySql starts having issues when you reach large sized tables... (10M rows+)

Not sure if that's true or not...just what I heard...

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (2, Informative)

Sircus (16869) | about 11 years ago | (#6823273)

mysql> select count(*) from histticks;
| count(*) |
| 80081227 |

No, it's not true. (This is just a quick example I pulled out, we have larger tables).

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823300)

Cool :-) And does it now have row based locking? (I need that for my EJB stuff)...

I don't think it used to ... but I have to admit that was ages ago... :-(

Maybe it's time I started looking at mySql more closely

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

chrisbolt (11273) | about 11 years ago | (#6823379)

Yes, if you use the InnoDB table type, which also gives you transactions.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (3, Informative)

Sircus (16869) | about 11 years ago | (#6823478)

From the MySQL docs:

Version 4.0 of the MySQL server includes many enhancements and new features:

* The InnoDB table type is now included in the standard binaries, adding transactions, row-level locking, and foreign keys. See section 7.5 InnoDB Tables.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

noselasd (594905) | about 11 years ago | (#6823422)

Bullshit. Having a table with about 70M rows now, it works fine. (tables need to be created with raid type though, so they are split in multiple files)

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (3, Informative)

Psyx (619571) | about 11 years ago | (#6823552)

My largest table works fine at way over

4 billion rows.

And yes, I've got other tables with more than 1 billion rows.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823267)

Why this is so sad? MySQL has it's own strenghts and that's why it's more popular.

This is like Linux vs *BSD issue.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823444)

True. Its the hype/big words vs the reliable/already works.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (0, Troll)

Manic Ken (678260) | about 11 years ago | (#6823279)

Ahh....Monsters statistics also have more jobs for M$ software, so therefore it must be the future!???

There is naught, nor ought there be nothing so exalted on the face of God's grey earth as that prince of databases....PostgreSQL!! (and Mimer).

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (2, Insightful)

calethix (537786) | about 11 years ago | (#6823412)

"Even though PostgreSQL has more features and is more promising and powerful, mySQL gets more publicity. This means that mySQL will be the open source database that will replace most commercial databases."

Um, no it doesn't. MySQL's popularity has absolutely nothing to do with it's ability to replace most commercial databases. Even if MySQL is the only open source option, if it doesn't have the features that companies need then they won't switch.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

axxackall (579006) | about 11 years ago | (#6823655)

MySQL's popularity has absolutely nothing to do with it's ability to replace most commercial databases.

And vice versa: MySQL's ability to replace most commercial databases has absolutely nothing to do with it's popularity. In other words: you can put very smart and well designed features to PostgreSQL, but MySQL has more populariy and more of a critical mass. So, in new open source projects people almost always prefer MySQL, while in commercial organizations technology decision makers always (again almost) consider MySQL for any db server where they don't afraid to save some money on db licenses.

Unless PostgreSQL Inc begin doing something about popularity, all features of PostgreSQL ORDBMS are useless for the most of technology decision makers.

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (2, Interesting)

CausticWindow (632215) | about 11 years ago | (#6823473)

I started fiddling with mysql, but moved on to postgresql when my job required it. Mysql is ok for most applications, but I must say that postgre flogs mysql featurewise.

The one thing that mysql excells in, is their greit documentation with very useful comments. I guess that makes learning mysql very easy for beginners, and is a good reason to keep using it, if you compare it to the online postgre docs.

There are some good postgre books though..

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1, Troll)

AVee (557523) | about 11 years ago | (#6823538)

The difference isn't in the publicity. mySql is the dumber database and therefore used by the people that don't understand things like transactions etc. Just like their are still people developing applications on top of access databases and most of them are feeling very smart and think they understand databases...

Re:mySQL gets more publicity (1)

i_really_dont_care (687272) | about 11 years ago | (#6823647)

This means that mySQL will be the open source database that will replace most commercial databases.

And I tell you why: Because it supports Microsoft Windows perfectly. And, yes I know that PostgreSql theoretically works under Cygwin...

all "pgsql vs mysql" posts below this subject pls (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823152)

So we can get them neatly sorted out of the way of the interesting comments. Thanks.

WOOHOO!! (0, Flamebait)

PinkBird (317418) | about 11 years ago | (#6823165)

Oracle is getting to be as bad as the Evil Empire Microsoft. We run an Oracle shop and pay boatloads of money a year to support.

Re:WOOHOO!! (5, Insightful)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823184)

You would still have to pay boatloads for support...even with postgres... Open Source does not mean 24/7 Support calls...

Re:WOOHOO!! (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | about 11 years ago | (#6823629)

I know that in business it's down to risk management, but if you really need 24/7 support to keep your database running, that tells me your DB Admins aren't up to the task, and that your DB Software is too flakey. Afterall, it's just another piece of software...

Re:WOOHOO!! (1)

GoofyBoy (44399) | about 11 years ago | (#6823298)

So stop using Oracle?

How does charging lots of money = evil?

PostgreSQL fanboy (5, Informative)

realnowhereman (263389) | about 11 years ago | (#6823200)

I can't say a bad thing about postgresql; this was really the only thing I felt the need for. For anyone who hasn't tried it you really should. Although I don't want to start a MySQL v postgresql flamewar, after trying both I think that postgres has the edge. Mysql was undisputably easier to work with and (at the time) was faster. PostgreSQL has moved on at a much faster rate though. In particular postgresql has solid support for transactions, large objects, subselects, object oriented tables. I'm convinced that if you use databases long enough you'll want every last one of these and won't be able to do without.

Re:PostgreSQL fanboy (1)

mshiltonj (220311) | about 11 years ago | (#6823310)

Agreed. With replication, I'm happy. Now, if they can add clustering and/or failover functionality, I'll be *really* happy. But replication goes loooong way, bub.

Re:PostgreSQL fanboy (1)

timbloid (208531) | about 11 years ago | (#6823340)

Surely you could move the clustering/failover to your application layer?

Re:PostgreSQL fanboy (1)

Dan Ost (415913) | about 11 years ago | (#6823616)

You could, but if you can push a mechanism down to the lowest level that
supports the objects that the mechanism works on (in this case, into the
database), then all applications built above that level can take advantage
of the new mechanism without reimplementing it.

Think about it. If you have 10 applications that use a db, do you want to
implement clustering/failover once for each application or just once for the

Re:PostgreSQL fanboy (5, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 11 years ago | (#6823462)

I don't want to start a MySQL v postgresql flamewar

Awww. Go one, you know you want to really. Here, I'll help get the ball rolling:

I've only every tried MySQL once, and that was for a database course assigment. It didn't have the features required for Question 1, so I switched to PostgreSQL. From this I deduce that MySQL is crap.

There. That wasn't hard, was it? All that is required is a strongly stated, yet uninformed, opinion about either. Now we just need some other contributors...

eRServer and PG Replicator (5, Interesting)

juahonen (544369) | about 11 years ago | (#6823218)

This is indeed good news, as free software always is. But eRServer can only operate in single-master mode, which makes it unsuitable for high-availability kind of work. Single-master systems are good for load-balancing on installations where most of the queries to the DB are SELECTs.

eRServer comes a bit late. We already have PostgreSQL Replicator [] , which is multi-master. Unfortunately PG Replicator is not supported anymore. The latest version it can work with is 7.1, and the project's latest news are timestamped nearly two years ago.

what's wrong with mySQL robbIE? no monIE from them (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823220)

fauxking pumper-dumper stock markup FraUDs abound. whois going to be held accouNTabull?

as for the PostBlock(tm) devise, y'all should shred the saykrud kode for that, as it is embarrassing, as well as useless.

that's right, robbIEs' blocked ip addresses throughout the northeast/central parts of US, in sum inane effort to block the planet/population rescue initiative/suck up the their corepirate nazi sponsors. either behaviour is not good/doesn't help.

no matter. the badtoll for their behaviours will be repaid by you/us.

fuddles'.con is running linux now. no DOWt about that.

fauxking phonIE payper liesense stock markup FraUD execrable/hive that they are.

that's right, after the walking dead finish exterminating themselves, & sadly enough, some of us, it won't take long to clean up this cesspool of greed/fear execrable.

we're calling it the planet/population rescue program (formerly unknown as the oil for babies initiatve).

the Godless wons are helping by continuing to show where their hearts lie.

fortunately, mr stallman et AL, etcetera, is now offering comparable/superior software, to the payper liesense spy/bug wear feechurned models, in almost every circumstance. there'll be few, if any more softwar billyonerrors, as if there's a need for even won. tell 'em robbIE. you are won of the last wons whois soul DOWt, right? .asp for va lairIE's whoreabull pateNTdead PostBlock(tm) devise?, used against the truth/to protect robbIE's payper liesense stock markup bosses/corepirate nazi 'sponsors'. yuk.

back on task.

what might happen to US if unprecedented evile/the felonious georgewellian southern baptist freemason fuddite rain of error, fails to be intervened on?

you already know that too. stop pretending. it doesn't help/makes things worse.

they could burn up the the main processor. that would be the rapidly heating planet/population, in case you're still pretending not to notice.

of course, having to badtoll va lairIE's whoreabully infactdead, pateNTdead PostBlock(tm) devise, robbIE's ego, the walking dead, etc..., doesn't slow us down a bit.

that's right. those foulcurrs best get ready to see the light. the WANing daze of the phonIE greed/fear/ego based, thieving/murdering payper liesense hostage taking stock markup FraUD georgewellian fuddite execrable are #ed. talk about a wormIE cesspool of deception? eradicating yOUR domestic corepirate nazi terrorist/gangsters will be the new national pastime.

communications will improve, using whatever power sources are available.

you gnu/software folks are to be commended. we'd be nearly doomed by now (instead, we're opening yet another isp service) without y'all. the check's in the mail again.

meanwhile... for those yet to see the light.

don't come crying to us when there's only won channel/os left.

nothing has changed since the last phonIE ?pr? ?firm? generated 'news' brIEf. lots of good folks/innocents are being killed/mutilated daily by the walking dead. if anything the situations are continuing to deteriorate. you already know that.

the posterboys for grand larcenIE/deception would include any & all of the walking dead who peddle phonIE stock markup payper to millions of hardworking conservative folks, & then, after stealing/spending/disappearing the real dough, pretend that nothing ever happened. sound familiar robbIE? these fauxking corepirate nazi larcens, want us to pretend along with them, whilst they continue to squander yOUR "investmeNTs", on their soul DOWt craving for excess/ego gratification. yuk

no matter their ceaseless efforts to block the truth from you, the tasks (planet/population rescue) will be completed.

the lights are coming up now.

you can pretend all you want. our advise is to be as far away from the walking dead contingent as possible, when the big flash occurs. you wouldn't want to get any of that evile on you.

as to the free unlimited energy plan, as the lights come up, more&more folks will stop being misled into sucking up more&more of the infant killing barrolls of crudeness, & learn that it's more than ok to use newclear power generated by natural (hydro, solar, etc...) methods. of course more information about not wasting anything/behaving less frivolously is bound to show up, here&there.

cyphering how many babies it costs for a barroll of crudeness, we've decided to cut back, a lot, on wasteful things like giving monIE to felons, to help them destroy the planet/population.

no matter. the #1 task is planet/population rescue. the lights are coming up. we're in crisis mode. you can help.

the unlimited power (such as has never been seen before) is freely available to all, with the possible exception of the aforementioned walking dead.

consult with/trust in yOUR creator. more breathing. vote with yOUR wallet. seek others of non-aggressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit, moving you.

pay no heed/monIE to the greed/fear based walking dead.

each harmed innocent carries with it a bad toll. it will be repaid by you/us. the Godless felons will not be available to make reparations.

pay attention. that's definitely affordable, plus, collectively, you might develop skills which could prevent you from being misled any further by phonIE ?pr? ?firm? generated misinformation.

good work so far. there's still much to be done. see you there. tell 'em robbIE.

as has been noted before, lookout bullow.

Let's be honest, ok??? (0, Flamebait)

botzi (673768) | about 11 years ago | (#6823224)

This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle as the de facto RDBMS standard.

Whatever, dude, I know that everything OS-ed is saint, but why can't we just one single time stay realistic????
Anyway, this thing above.... not gonna happen real soon now.

Re:Let's be honest, ok??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823460)

Well, technically it says that it makes PostgreSQL one step closer, which it does. It doesn't say anything about PostgreSQL replacing Oracle tommorrow.

Good day for OS (1)

nepheles (642829) | about 11 years ago | (#6823228)

A Good Thing(tm)

Corporations are the people Open-Source needs to get on its side. (And, I might add, the OS community is doing a very good job here). They give a project name-recognition, thousands of users, good infastructure, and credibility. PostgreSQL will hopefully begin to compete seriously with Oracle. Another feather in the Open-Source cap.

asdf? (-1, Offtopic)

gredman (665454) | about 11 years ago | (#6823231)


But (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823237)

PostreSQL still dosent support inverse and shadow keys. Until they support them, We will continue to fork out 100.000 a year for Oracle.

Re:But (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823486)

"We will continue to fork out 100.000 a year for Oracle"
Just $100? Can you put me in touch with your Account Manager.. we're paying a lot more than that.

Terminate RDBMSs (-1, Flamebait)

Jagunco (547686) | about 11 years ago | (#6823244)

These awaful pieces of flawed technology will be obsolete and thought as one of the deformities of the malformed "information age" once things such as object prevalence [] get into mainstream, which will happen once the amount of main memory on computers become able to store the whole data in hand.

Re:Terminate RDBMSs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823329)

Hehe, you're silly.

Where I work, we have a data warehouse, which grows about 8 GB per day, and holds 13 months of live data. Lets see you hold that in RAM !

Re:Terminate RDBMSs (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 11 years ago | (#6823513)

Where I work, we have a data warehouse, which grows about 8 GB per day, and holds 13 months of live data. Lets see you hold that in RAM !

And then watch the DBA break down and cry as the UPS fails during a blackout...

Re:Terminate RDBMSs (1)

Jagunco (547686) | about 11 years ago | (#6823634)

And you clueless. There are some technologies [] that can dump the hd storage devices (no pun intended) and unify the whole memory speed hierarchy. If that happens, say goodbye to rdbms's and swallow something like object prevalence.

plPHP (4, Informative)

jdh-22 (636684) | about 11 years ago | (#6823258)

They also have been working on a procedual language for PostgreSQL for server side triggers, and functions. Information can be found here, plPHP [] .

PostgreSQL has made some pretty nice advancements post version 7+, performance and feature wise. I worked on a intranet where the company spent lots of money trying to get an Oracle solution to work, but found it was way to slow. The suggestion of PostgreSQL, and MS SQL came up. We tested PostgreSQL, and it was acutually faster, and easier to maintain then our Oracle database. The best part was, it was free!

One step closer to Oracle... (-1, Flamebait)

jargoone (166102) | about 11 years ago | (#6823283)

... and another leap ahead of MySQL. MySQL is essentially a glorified flat file in comparison.

Re:One step closer to Oracle... (1)

JAgostoni (685117) | about 11 years ago | (#6823481)

MySQL and PostgreSQL have entirely different purposes driving them. MySQL = fast, small, low-footprint at the sacrifice of features. PostgreSQL = full-featured at the sacrifice of performance (though, just a little performance). So when you say a leap "ahead" of MySQL, you'll have to qualify that. Myself, I prefer PostgreSQL, simply because of the features. I USE MySql because it is fast a 99.9% of hosting providers offer no other alternative.

Ghostbusters 3, the movie (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823293)

Why hasn't Ghostbusters 3 been made? Seriously now think about it, wouldn't a third Ghostbusters movie be cool? IMO Bill Murray doesn't seem to have many award winning movies coming his way in the near future. IT'S TIME for a Ghostbusters 3 movie!

Cmon say it with me, Ghostbusters! Ghostbusters! Yeah! Who you gonna call? GHOSTBUSTERS

One Step Closer? (3, Funny)

cmay (687134) | about 11 years ago | (#6823295)

So I get up and take a step toward the coffee machine, I guess I am ALSO "one step closer" to China!

gnu millennium spells doom for stock markup frauds (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823303)

that's right. J. Public et AL has yet to become involved in open/honest 'net communications/commerce in a meaningful way. that's mostly due to the MiSinformation suppLIEd buy phonIE ?pr? ?firm?/stock markup FraUD execrable, etc...

truth is, there's no better/more affordable/effective way that we know of, for J. to reach other J.'s &/or their respective markets.

the recipe is:

consult with/trust in yOUR creator. vote with yOUR wallet. more breathing. seek others of non-agressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit.

use key words/indexing to identify yourself/your products.

the overbullowned greed/fear based phonIE marketeers are self eliminating by their owned greed/fear/ego based evile MiSintentions. they must deny the existence of the power that is dissolving their ability to continue their self-centered evile behaviours.

as the lights continue to come up, you'll see what we mean. meanwhile, there are plenty of challenges, not the least of which is the planet/population rescue (from the corepirate nazi/walking dead contingent) initiative.

EVERYTHING is going to change, despite the lameNT of the evile wons. you can bet your .asp on that. when the lights come up, there'll be no going back, & no where to hide.

we weren't planted here to facilitate/perpetuate the excesses of a handful of Godless felons. you already know that? yOUR ONLY purpose here is to help one another. any other pretense is totally false.

pay attention (to yOUR environment, for example). that's quite affordable, & leads to insights on preserving life as it should/could/will be again. everything's ALL about yOUR motives.

take care, we're here for you.

as for va lairIE/robbIE et AL, & their disgusting need to suck up to their corepirate nazi sponsors buy use of manipulation/censorship. they are their owned reward eye gas.

mr auerbach seems like a decent sort. icann see how he would be somewhat discouraged.
[ Reply to This ]

Synchronous Replication? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823312)

While this is a nice step forward, the real reason large sites utilize Oracle is because of synchronous replication.

The replication needs to be able to keep all data consistent across multiple servers, without any conflicts. Then, if a particular server goes down, the DNS can simply fail over to a second server.

Once the above has been achieved, then we have a viable alternative to Oracle.

OOS vs. Oracle (5, Informative)

Baavgai (598847) | about 11 years ago | (#6823334)

> This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle...

Please! While this may help win the hearts and minds of OOS geeks, it does little to improve their standing in the business world.

Oracle is as established in the database world as Microsoft is on the desktop. This alone would doom any OOS wannabe to quiet places like web server back ends where they already do well anyway ( e.g. mySql ).

Put aside the technical considerations, support, client base, etc and PostgreSQL still offers as much of a threat to Oracle as mySql or dBase. The only real threat I've seen to Oracle supremacy is Microsoft's SQL Server but, of course, that's only in MS shops.

Re:OOS vs. Oracle (1)

Woodblock (22276) | about 11 years ago | (#6823384)

I beg to differ. Where I work, we already have replaced Oracle with Postgres, and having a enterprise level replication package will let us avoid the myriad of half-assed hacks we were using.

Re:OOS vs. Oracle (4, Insightful)

rcs1000 (462363) | about 11 years ago | (#6823472)

PostgreSQL and mySQL are real, undeniable threats to Oracle. Not threats in the sense that Oracle's business will disappear, or that either of these databases will become de facto standards, but threats in that they will indisputably affect Oracle's ability to grow its database revenues.

My forecast, for what it's worth, is that Oracle's database business is in secular decline.

It doesn't matter that mySQL or PostgreSQL can't do everything that Oracle 9i does. That they do some of it, do it better and do it cheaper is what is key.

Five years ago, if you wanted to build a web-based application of any size, you probably went with Oracle. Now there is a free option. At the very least corporate purchasers will use this as a way to extract price concessions from their Oracle salesperson. More likely, in a few places (at first) PostgreSQL and mySQL will work their way into the corporate psyche by being used. Maybe for internal stuff, where budgets are tight. Or where projects are being "hidden" from management. But slowly, open source databases are taking hold.

The next stage is for the enterprise application vendors (SAP, PeopleSoft, Siebel) to start supporting OSS databases. They'll want to, because it lowers the cost of projects to clients, while safeguarding their (falling) application license revenues. Hence, SAP "donating" SAP DB to mySQL. My forecast (number two) is that we'll see all three of the application vendors at least trialling OSS databases with beta customers by end '03. (Yes, I know SAP is already doing it, and that PeopleSoft has issued press releases but no product.)

And in this way, in the same way Linux slipped quietly into corporates, OSS databases will take off.

My only hope is that PostgreSQL, which is a much superior product to mySQL, will get the publicity it richly deserves.


SAPDB relicenced to MySQL (3, Informative)

emmavl (202243) | about 11 years ago | (#6823351)

Starting with the next release SAPDB [] will be rebranded as MaxDB [] by MySQL AB [] .
This will probably mean that PostgreSQL will have a very hard time competing with MySQL ! (also see the info [] on the SAPDB webpage)
At the same time the licencing will change to pure GPL (no more LGPL libraries !!!)

Re:SAPDB relicenced to MySQL (2, Interesting)

noselasd (594905) | about 11 years ago | (#6823485)

>At the same time the licencing will change to pure GPL (no more LGPL libraries !!!) And that is supposed to be a good thing ?? Sure if you're RMS, but most of us are not. So now on must opensource the app , or pay. Great :-/

Re:SAPDB relicenced to MySQL (1)

emmavl (202243) | about 11 years ago | (#6823531)

I never said this is a good thing. Neither do most people on the sapdb mailing list ...

Re:SAPDB relicenced to MySQL (1)

emmavl (202243) | about 11 years ago | (#6823500)

Duh ..., the first link should have been SAPDB []

Re:SAPDB relicenced to MySQL (2, Interesting)

aeoo (568706) | about 11 years ago | (#6823641)

I think PostgreSQL is infinitely superior to SAPDB. Have you actually tried using SAPDB? I have tried it on Solaris, and it failed to run on our version of Solaris (I believe it was 8). I looked at their home page and documentation and I was left feeling that SapDB is a half-baked, kludgey, crusty product.

PostgreSQL on the other hand just works, is fast and is smooth as silk. I think even plain old MySQL 4.x is better than SAPDB (yea, it lacks features, but it's a better product overall).

Is this only a partial solution? (5, Interesting)

MarkSwanson (648947) | about 11 years ago | (#6823368)

Please let me know if I'm wrong...

I visited the site, and the commercial site too and it seems this is only simple replication with the master being a single point of failure. F.E.

1. update a row in the master
2. master replicates the update to multiple slaves
3. clients perform select operations against the slaves (nice load balancing opportunity)
4. the master crashes
5. No one can write until the master comes back online.

Here are the steps that seem to be missing:
6. the slaves elect a new master
7. if the old master comes back up it must realize a new master is present and become a slave.
8. clients using JDBC would need some mechanism of finding out what the new master is when an update/insert/delete fails.


Re:Is this only a partial solution? (2, Informative)

einer (459199) | about 11 years ago | (#6823512)

8. clients using JDBC would need some mechanism of finding out what the new master is when an update/insert/delete fails.

C-JDBC may take care of this []

IANADBA (5, Insightful)

WeirdKid (260577) | about 11 years ago | (#6823373)

I like PostgreSQL, and Open Source deserves capitalization, but I'd like to hear an enterprise DBA's perspective on if this really compares to Oracle's configurability, clustering capabilities, or the seamless swapping of redundant database packages when deployed on, say, an EMC 1000, for reliability and failover. BTW, for this request, "enterprise" = Fortune 100, not Joe's Web Hosting.

Like the subject says, I'm not a DBA, but I know some pretty heavy-duty ones that say nothing beats Oracle running on HP Superdomes with EMC storage.

Re:IANADBA (5, Informative)

BigGerman (541312) | about 11 years ago | (#6823503)

As someone who has been messing with Oracle for more than 10 years, I must say that NOTHING (in commercial or OSS world) comes even close on the high-end hardware you are describing. Properly tuned, humming Oracle database is a work of art.
But it is also true that wast majority of Oracle installations are poorely implemented (due to enourmous and unjustyfiable complexity), Oracle's management software sucked (getting better recently), support far from stellar (telephone support hardly usable), yearly costs are sky-high.
I started looking at PostgreSQL and the more I look the more I like what I see - it is conceptually simple, seems to have adequate performance with large tables, JDBC seems to work well too, stored procedures language is very close to Oracle's (I wish for better exceptions handling), and the whole thing is more than adequate replacement for 80% of Oracle installations I have personally seen.
And I have to add that I tried very hard to like MySQL but it did not work for me.
Everything above is IMHO and the usual disclaimers apply.

Pardon my ignorance (3, Funny)

dborod (26190) | about 11 years ago | (#6823400)

We use PostgreSQL a lot. Since all the of the sites related to this story are in the process of being /.ed, can someone tell me what this replication thingy does?

PostgreSQL is a non-entity... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823406)

...until it provides a proper explanation of its name.

Yes, PostgreSQL is a concatenation of Postgres SQL - its former name, but Postgres is not a word.

WTF is it supposed to mean? Or is it just nonsense and I'm to view the product in the same light?

What (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823420)

This makes PostgreSQL one step closer to being able to replace Oracle as the de facto RDBMS standard.

About 500 more to go kids.

Another powerful Open Source DB (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823492)


It's not perfect for everything, but if you want scalability, failure resilience and excellent query time, it's well worth a shot.

As an added bonus, it gives you a good excuse to learn erlang, so that LISP-weenies can sneer at you.

Thanks (1)

Bromrrrrr (166605) | about 11 years ago | (#6823522)

"PostgreSQL Inc, the commercial company providing replication software and support for PostgreSQL, open sourced their eRServer replication product"

Many thanks you guys....we've been waiting for this a long time

In Soviet Russia... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6823540)

...The commune development fields know as PostgreSQL REPLICATE YOU!!!

enterprise application support (2, Insightful)

FreeBSDbigot (162899) | about 11 years ago | (#6823573)

Until SAP, PeopleSoft, and Oracle applications support it, which will happen, respectively, probably no time soon, probably never, and never, it won't "replace Oracle as the de facto RDBMS standard."

StarFish (3, Interesting)

mflaster (702697) | about 11 years ago | (#6823592)

[ shameless_plug ]
StarFish [] is a block-level storage system allowing on-the-fly geographic replication, that would work with any database. It was OpenSourced by Lucent a few months ago. It won the Best Paper award at Freenix '03.
[ /shameless_plug ]

Kick off Football Season with PostgreSQL (0, Offtopic)

slazlo (87565) | about 11 years ago | (#6823611)

shameless plug
Since Football season is here and a lot of OS workers hang out in offices come check out a site which allows you the functionality of Blogger, Yahoo Groups and allows you to run your own Football Pools. The whole site architecture is OS using AOLserver, PostgreSQL, Postfix, on GNU-Linux

PostgreSQL kicks butt and so will the Redskins this year. You can check out the some of the technical details at [] and make your predictions using PG to store your picks or check out a sample blog at Never Give Up []

end of shameless plug

Top Five Components (2, Interesting)

devnullkac (223246) | about 11 years ago | (#6823651)

From the press release:

eRServer gives us one of the 'top five' components that the PostgreSQL database has needed in order to compete with commercial enterprise databases such as Oracle and DB2 on equal terms
Does anyone know what the other four components are and whether they're already here?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>