Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

With Oracle slowly transforming MySQL into a 'free-open-core, closed-outer-shell' RDBMS[1], PostgreSQL is quickly becoming the main go-to alternative for anyone who wants to avoid database vendor lock-in.

Hopefully SalesForce will contribute its improvements back to the PostgreSQL community.

--

[1] For example, see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4400797




And then Oracle will buy Salesforce... Larry did say something like that but he said that the price is too high.

Here is my predictions: Salesforce is will start investing into new technologies and building cool stuff. However, that will not look good on stock price because R&D costs will skyrocket - and our "efficient" stock market does not like long term visions. The stock price will collapse. The board will panic and Larry will "save the day".


Have you programmed Salesforce?

It's a steaming pile of poo. SOQL is really terrible and don't even get me started on apex, it's like someone took all the worst bits of Java and made them into a programming language. It's really slow to boot, I was using it with a client last week and it was taking 10-20 seconds to load any page.

I also really don't get how they're not making more money given the prices they charge.

Expect nothing at all out of them.


What is better than Salesforce in terms of APIs and performance?


Larry and the Oracle execs truly hate SFDC. They really build up the rivalry internally to Oracle employees and paint Salesforce as the big rival that everyone needs to band together to beat. Combined with the duplication of products that would occur if Oracle acquired Salesforce I would be beyond shocked if it ever happened. At that point Salesforce would be so irrelevant that it wouldn't matter.


In my experience, things you described are probably true, but they have nothing to do with acquisition. Actually it is very much desired (Larry was hating PeopleSoft a few years ago... and see what happen).

And duplication of products was never a problem for Larry: he just kills the one with less customers. For example, in case of BEA and Oracle Application Server: BEA WebLogic replaced Oracle Application Server. In this case, in case of acquisition, Oracle cloud offering will be replaced with Salesforce.


Salesforce is currently trading at sky high prices in relation to their revenues and the fact that they are still losing money on gaap basis.

So i do not think you are right about the stock market. The stock market apparently sees something that the accounting numbers do not show.


Where's the evidence? The linked source refers to closing test cases, which makes it more closed source, not open core.

Also, it is highly entertaining that most PostgreSQL news here tend to dwell to MySQL.


Well to be fair a lot of MySQL related news will have a comment along the lines "try PG, the real database".


Speaking of open source, Salesforce is also invested in HBase with at least one committer to the project.


Oracle no longer publishing their test cases hardly constitutes "transforming MySQL into a 'free-open-sore, closed-outer-shell' RDBMS", moreover there is no evidence that folks are adopting PostgreSQL because they're afraid of MySQL vendor lock-in. If one feels they must pay from MySQL they can give their money to Oracle, Percona, or MariaDB, all of which whom will happily provide MySQL support for a fee.

PostgreSQL is quickly becoming the main go-to alternative for people who are obsessed with the hip-now shiny thing. These are some of the same folks who will mindlessly advocate zsh over bash, tmux over screen, htop over top, and ack over grep.


Many of my clients were using MySQL, got freaked out by what's going on with Oracle, and decided to at least look into PostgreSQL. They were very impressed with what they saw, and in some cases admitted that they should have gone with PostgreSQL from the beginning.

In my experience, everyone who tries PostgreSQL loves it and sticks with it. That doesn't make it a mindless choice, or the "hip-now shiny thing." It does mean that Oracle's decisions are encouraging people to look at alternatives, and that the alternative is, in fact, often better than what they're currently using.


You make a reasonable point in your first paragraph. There is no strong evidence of vendor lock-in in MySQL's case, though Oracle's past history makes for legitimate suspicion on the part of prospective MySQL users.

It's unfortunate that your second paragraph is either trollish or ill-informed. Sure, there is a part of group-think about Postgres' popularity in some communities, but Postgres has a number of advantages over MySQL (though I'd say MySQL has a better multi-server story). Implying this plays little part in its growing popularity is condescending.


Postgres has been quietly competent since before this generation of hipsters was born. It is nice to see the user base grow, since MySQL had a huge boost for a long time just for being more noob friendly in a way postgres unfortunately never tried.

And htop is really nice.


> Postgres has been quietly competent since before this generation of hipsters was born.

Nice sound bite but PostgreSQL (as we know) was first released around 1996.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: