Open Source Ingres for Linux

[Francois Ouellette]

Lots of interesting details and points!

I have used and/or supported Ingres installations since 1985, so I might be
a bit biased (aren't we all) on its technical capabilities compared to
others.
As interesting or capable MySQL and Postgres might be they were never
developed to become commercially distributed products, so they were
developed and enhanced in a differenc way that Ingres.

For the technical part the complete doc and data sheets can be found here:
http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres/documents

In a nutshell, I guess Ingres is like any other RDBMS and can be used where
a relational data repository is required, on Linux and other platforms.
What makes it unique for Open Source is that it started as a commercial
product.
It can accommodate small footprint systems (a couple of users on a small
Linux box) as well as hundreds on a big-iron UNIX system.

I have supported Ingres database servers running 24x7 with 700 interactive
users. I haven't seen too many Postgres or MySQL installations of that size!

  François Ouellette
<fouellet-cpI+UMyWUv9BDgjK7y7TUQ at public.gmane.org>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "D. Hugh Redelmeier" <hugh-pmF8o41NoarQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org>
To: <tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org>
Sent: Saturday, 12 March, 2005 18:04
Subject: Re: [TLUG]: Open Source Ingres for Linux


> | 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