[isf-wifidog] Again: Database support - this time not about MySQL ; )

[Max Horváth]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Yeah, I agree ... and what I basically meant if it would be maybe a  
plan for the future to support Oracle. I mean, what advantage would  
it be for a WiFiDog auth server when running on a Oracle database  
instead of running it on Postgres? So would be even useful to support  
Oracle in the WiFiDog 2.0 release (for what developers could use  
Oracle XE)?

Cheers, Max!

Am 27.02.2006 um 16:16 schrieb Benoit Grégoire:

> On February 27, 2006 09:10 am, Max Horváth wrote:
>> - gpg control packet
>> Hey folks,
>>
>> today Oracle released the final version of Oracle 10 XE ... basically
>> a Oracle 10g 10.2 database server with resource restrictions only .
>> It means the database is restricted to 1 instance, 1 CPU, 1 GB RAM
>> and a maximum database size of 4 GB.
>>
>> Nonetheless I was thinking about if we'd support Oracle as it has
>> great replication and scalability features. As far as I know Postgres
>> SQL server uses almost the same SQL definitions as Oracle does - so I
>> think supporting and maintaining Oracle wouldn't be as heavy as it
>> was with MySQL.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> I think the same arguments for supporting a single database apply.   
> It would
> possibly be slightly less painfull to support Oracle, but the  
> target market
> is probably two orders of magnitude smaller.  All the testing and  
> concurrent
> developpement dificulties would remain.
>
> In any event, multi-master replication is disabled in 10 XE, which  
> would be
> it's only potential advantage over postgres.
>
> -- 
> Benoit Grégoire, http://benoitg.coeus.ca/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFEAz4n+BKgC+eQ3ooRAhyHAKCYlu7Enz3xY71w4+x994gHjEO5FgCfZOM2
I3GJ1wn6RgHaRaYzV5XI7o0=
=z9zy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----