On Feb 10, 2005, at 12:49 AM, Jaime Casanova wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> i'm planning try to do a comparative between some DBMS
> and postgresql (informix, oracle, m$ sql server,
> firebird and even mysql) i'm coordinating with people
> in the irc spanish postgresql channel.
>
> 2) point me to a good benchmark test or script that
> can be used?

The TPC tests are fairly widely accepted. The thing with a benchmark
is they are unlikely to simulate your real traffic. But it is always
fun to look at numbers

> 3) any comments?
>

If you plan on making your results public be very careful with the
license agreements on the other db's. I know Oracle forbids the
release of benchmark numbers without their approval.

--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq

Mitch Pirtle <mitch.pirtle@gmail.com> writes:
> It would be really useful to know if anyone has ever been punished for
> doing this, as IANAL but that restriction is going to be very, VERY
> difficult to back up in court without precedence. Is this just a
> deterrent, or is it real?

If Oracle doesn't eat your rear for lunch, it would only be because you
hadn't annoyed them sufficiently for them to bother. Under the terms of
the license agreement that you presumably clicked through, you gave up
your rights to publish anything they don't like. Do a little Google
research. For instance
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op...6opfoster.html

The impression I get is that if you are willing to spend lots of $$
you could *maybe* win the case, if you can still find a judge who thinks
that the public good outweighs private contract law (good luck, with the
Republicans in office). Do you have a larger budget for legal issues
than Oracle does? If so, step right up.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?

http://archives.postgresql.org

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:38:13 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> If Oracle doesn't eat your rear for lunch,

That would be more like an appetizer at a california cuisine place.

> it would only be because you
> hadn't annoyed them sufficiently for them to bother. Under the terms of
> the license agreement that you presumably clicked through, you gave up
> your rights to publish anything they don't like. Do a little Google
> research. For instance
> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op...6opfoster.html

I did do the research, but couldn't find one instance where someone
was actually taken to task over it. So far it appears to be bluster.
Horrifying to some, but still bluster.

> The impression I get is that if you are willing to spend lots of $$
> you could *maybe* win the case, if you can still find a judge who thinks
> that the public good outweighs private contract law (good luck, with the
> Republicans in office). Do you have a larger budget for legal issues
> than Oracle does? If so, step right up.

The reason I asked is because this has a lot more to do with than just
money. This is restriction of speech as well, and publishing
benchmarks (simply as statistical data) cannot in any way be construed
as defamation or libel. Just because it is in the click-wrap contract
doesn't mean you waive certain rights, and this has been proven (and
now has precedence). Again, I would love to know of any instances
where someone published (forbidden) benchmarks and was actually
pursued in a court of law. Well, and the result, too ;-)

I ask not to cause trouble, but to learn if this is just a deterrent
that has never been tested ("small pebble") or a well-defined threat
that will be enforced ("plasma cannon").

-- Mitch, thinking this is off topic but still fascinating

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:38:13 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Mitch Pirtle <mitch.pirtle@gmail.com> writes:
> > It would be really useful to know if anyone has ever been punished for
> > doing this, as IANAL but that restriction is going to be very, VERY
> > difficult to back up in court without precedence. Is this just a
> > deterrent, or is it real?
>
> If Oracle doesn't eat your rear for lunch, it would only be because you
> hadn't annoyed them sufficiently for them to bother. Under the terms of
> the license agreement that you presumably clicked through, you gave up
> your rights to publish anything they don't like. Do a little Google
> research. For instance
> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op...6opfoster.html
>
What about the free speech rigths, in USA they are in the constitution
and cannot be denied or revoked, IANAL.

And like stated by Mitch just numbers are not lies that can be pursued
in a court of law.

Think anout it, In USA you can speak and publish about the President
but cannot say anything about M$ or Oracles' DBMS?

regards,
Jaime Casanova

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 02:22:39 -0500,
Jaime Casanova <systemguards@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about the free speech rigths, in USA they are in the constitution
> and cannot be denied or revoked, IANAL.

You can voluntarily give up your rights to free speech in the US.

> And like stated by Mitch just numbers are not lies that can be pursued
> in a court of law.

I think part of the reason they don't want people doing this, is because
if you don't configure their database well, you can make it look bad
when it shouldn't.

> Think anout it, In USA you can speak and publish about the President
> but cannot say anything about M$ or Oracles' DBMS?

Not if you signed a contract that says you can't.

If you didn't actually sign an agreement saying you wouldn't publish
benchmarks, then you might have a case. You might argue that a click
through eula isn't a valid contract or that you are a third party
who isn't bound by whatever agreement the person who installed Oracle
made. However it probably would cost you a bundle to have a chance
at winning.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2005 at 02:22:39 -0500,
> Jaime Casanova <systemguards@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Think anout it, In USA you can speak and publish about the President
>>but cannot say anything about M$ or Oracles' DBMS?
>
>
> Not if you signed a contract that says you can't.
>
> If you didn't actually sign an agreement saying you wouldn't publish
> benchmarks, then you might have a case. You might argue that a click
> through eula isn't a valid contract or that you are a third party
> who isn't bound by whatever agreement the person who installed Oracle
> made. However it probably would cost you a bundle to have a chance
> at winning.

IANAL etc, but the key fear is more likely that Oracle merely cancel
your licence(s). And deny you any more. And prevent your software from
running on top of Oracle. At which point, you have to sue Oracle and
prove restraint of trade or unfair competition or similar. Don't forget
that you have no right to purchase Oracle licences, they are free to
sell to whoever they choose and under whatever conditions.

--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

On Feb 11, 2005, at 2:04 AM, Mitch Pirtle wrote:
>
> I did do the research, but couldn't find one instance where someone
> was actually taken to task over it. So far it appears to be bluster.
> Horrifying to some, but still bluster.
>

They may not have done that yet, but they _COULD_. And if they decide
to they have more money and power than you likely have and would drive
you into financial ruin for the rest of your life (Even if you are
correct). It is a big risk. I think that clause is in there so MS,
etc. can't say "Use FooSQL, its 428% faster than that Oracle POS Just
look!"

After using oracle in the last few months.. I can see why they'd want
to prevent those numbers.. Oracle really isn't that good. I had been
under the impression that it was holy smokes amazingly fast. It just
isn't. At least, in my experience it isn't. but that is another
story.

--
Jeff Trout <jeff@jefftrout.com>
http://www.jefftrout.com/
http://www.stuarthamm.net/


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings