Open Source Ingres for Linux

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Francois Ouellette <fouellet-cpI+UMyWUv9BDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org>

Sorry, what you say strikes me as hype, not information.  That makes
me nit pick.  OK, I admit it, I nit pick anyway.

| >From what I know Stonebreaker was the guy who first put in practice the
| theory developed by Codd and others and made it a commercial success.

I seem to remember System R predating Ingres.  Not a commercial
success, but I think that it evolved into DB/2, which is successful
(not sure -- I don't pay much attention to database systems).

| Postgres is a spinoff of Ingres and a research project, Ingres was the
| commercial version of the same concept.

My understanding at the time was that Postgress was the successor as a
research project.  So it ought to have shiny new ideas (no longer new
now).

| More like an early "open source"
| before its time!

There is no "before its time" for open source.  There has been open
source as long as there has been source.

| Ingres has matured as a commercial enterprise-class software product while
| Postgres remained a university project.
| 
| If you want the real thing, then go for Ingres!

There has been a lot of work on Postgress making it a practical tool.
Outside UCB.

I was hoping for a serious comparison, not just sloganeering.

Technical issues matter (what standards are supported, ACID, ...)

Pragmatic issues matter (what systems does it work on?  Well?
Resource utilization/requirements?  Is the code clean?  ...)

Social issues matter (have a group of developers coalesced around the
project?  Are they from diverse institutions (i.e. will it survive CA
losing interest)?), ...)

What characteristics of a project would make Ingres the right tool to
use?
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml