Oracle Database 10g given away for free

I said "good enough market"

I didnt say run anything and everything on it...

regards

Thing

 

If you noticed I said "good enough market"

As for lack of understanding...yeah right, that's why we have a 9i
RAQ.......we have no use for 14 Dell's running Oracle in it really...we
just thought they looked mean in black....and 14 boxes sounded a nice
number.

At the bottom end mysql is more than good enough for quite a decent % of
databases.....LAMP comes to mind....

MS laughed at Linux, they are not laughing now......now it is oracle's
turn....

regards

Thing

 

For that use PostgreSQL

 

Oracle can be run on linux.
MySQL and PostgreSQL can be run on Windows.

There isn't much point in trying to make this into a Lin vs Win pissing
match.
DB2 and Oracle are the top dogs in the enterprise database market, MSSQL
and Sybase would be next.
Postgres 8.1 is a good candidate

 

Nobody in their right mind would be considering mySQL and Oracle for
the same project. They are worlds apart. Not even comparable.

I'm pretty sure Microsoft still have a good laugh at Linux. And what
has Oracle got to do with Linux? Apart from the fact that they have,
for a long time, had a version available for Linux?

Oh, and I think you'll find that Oracle are making this move to combat
the market share MSSQL is eating away. I doubt they've even given
mySQL much of a second thought, other than the odd giggle or two.

 

I wonder if Microsoft will make Access free in response?

They already make MSDE, which is a free but hobbled version of SQL Server.
It has a limit (from memory) of 5 simultaneous users. There may also be a
file size restriction, but I have never hit it.

Also, you can buy the SQL Server Developer edition for around NZ$110. That
has user limitations too, but comes with the tools needed to easily manage
the DB (Enterprise Manager and Query Analyser).

So it looks like Oracle are joining the bandwagon. Getting developers
started on your product is a good way to ensure the final software also runs
on your (expensive) product. And if you can convince them to use lots of
stored procedures, triggers etc, you have them just about locked in -
porting costs become significant.

A difference with Oracle is that they are encouraging ISVs to embed Oracle
in their products - that is certainly a fresh approach.

Regards

Ron

 

Access itself is not suitable for resale products - it is useful for solving
in house problems quickly and very cost effecively. On the second front,
this is where MySQL can't compete - Access is effectively DBMS + 4GL / Forms
designer rolled together with a great report writer.

The database is very useful in small multi-user systems or to house
extensive 'system parameters' for applications.

The big problem is the usual one: companies build a system in MS Access
quickly and cost effecitively,this then grows, users get added then it
becomes cumbersome and inefficient & it is about this point in time that
people look at SQL Server - the should look at the start and know when to
convert - before things become cumbersome and performance suffers.

 

MSDE does not have a user limit as such - the query governer limits the
number of queries that will run concurrently resulting in a performance
ceiling as more users do more concurrent work - this slowdown happens faster
on busy systems as it is not only the number of users that effects this. It
is a very resonable method as the product is free, and is intended as a
stepping stone - an easy stepping stone to easy transition as systems and
companies grow to SQL Server.

 

The 'ideal' testing situation would have to be a standalone machine,

No one with any sense ever puts a dbms in line of sight of the internet. It
may have been fleetingly advocated by some in the mid nineties when things
like getting end users to write their own queries seemed like a good idea to
some, but now days, the dbms invariably store the corporate jewels so are
well and truly firewalled with no possible direct access or indirect access
for that matter.

Those that do think its OK are those that get worms.

The gotchas you are referring to are quite minimal - so long as you have a
sensible network config and firewalling. If they weren't it would be on TV
and reporters would be scaring shyte out of ordinary people.

I haven't looked too close at any of the Oracle exploits recently. I have
been shocked by the volume that have been coming out every few months, and
really this is an indication of what happens when you expose legacy code to
modern hacking techniques: code that works "100%" as it should do can be
riddled with exploits.

 

Umm, pretty much every site of any consequence is based on a dbms.

Worms ? Which host do these live on ?

 

Re-read his comments.

It is completely different having a web server that can access a
backend DB (or frontend DB to a backend DB) versus having a naked DBMS
publicly visible.

 

You know what?

If I thought there was anything in here to respond to I would.

I can't find anything to comment about though.

Did you try to add soemthing to the discussion? Sorry if I missed it.

 

Perhaps you missed the word "indirect".

 

SQL injection attacks are possible (there were some vulnerabilities for
this type of attack until patched in April/May this year)
But now I'm moving into the realm of "its possible but not currently an
issue"
Although, in doing some research this afternoon I have noted there is some
issue with the patch issued in April/May and
http://www.us-cert.gov/current/
"According to public reports, the patches included in this update, as
well as previous updates, may not adequately correct all security
vulnerabilities."