Comments on: Database management system choices – 4 categories of relational http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/ Choices in data management and analysis Fri, 29 Aug 2008 02:48:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Database management system choices — overview | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-88893 Database management system choices — overview | DBMS2 -- DataBase Management System Services Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:48:01 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-88893 [...] Part 2: Database management system choices – 4 categories of relational [...] [...] Part 2: Database management system choices – 4 categories of relational [...]

]]> By: Is H-Store the future of database management systems? — Too much information http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-76313 Is H-Store the future of database management systems? — Too much information Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:38:41 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-76313 [...] 2007 but have returned to the agenda in recent weeks thanks to an online discussion between Curt Monash and [...] [...] 2007 but have returned to the agenda in recent weeks thanks to an online discussion between Curt Monash and [...]

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74571 Curt Monash Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:35:54 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74571 OK. I checked with Vertica. They are "PostgreSQL-compatible" without using any PostgreSQL code. Exactly how compatible they are I don't know. Clearly they do not, for example, support abstract datatypes, and I doubt they support PostgreSQL's range of stored procedure languages either. CAM OK. I checked with Vertica. They are “PostgreSQL-compatible” without using any PostgreSQL code.

Exactly how compatible they are I don’t know. Clearly they do not, for example, support abstract datatypes, and I doubt they support PostgreSQL’s range of stored procedure languages either.

CAM

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74386 Curt Monash Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:04:38 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74386 Bence, I think Vertica is one of those systems that gets its parser, BI-tool connectivity, etc. in large part from PostgreSQL, but completely replaced the PostgreSQL back-end. But I'll ping the company and ask them to comment directly. CAM Bence,

I think Vertica is one of those systems that gets its parser, BI-tool connectivity, etc. in large part from PostgreSQL, but completely replaced the PostgreSQL back-end.

But I’ll ping the company and ask them to comment directly.

CAM

]]> By: Bence http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74347 Bence Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:07:37 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-74347 Vertica is a bit confusing. Someone from the company says it's not PostgreSQL-based here: http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/postgresql-makes-clean-sweep-of-dw-isvs-14778 Vertica is a bit confusing. Someone from the company says it’s not PostgreSQL-based here:
http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/database/soup/archives/postgresql-makes-clean-sweep-of-dw-isvs-14778

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-73378 Curt Monash Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:49:37 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-73378 Lukas, If you mean the specialty data warehousing guys, you're absolutely right. At a minimum, Netezza, Vertica, ParAccel, and Greenplum started from PostegreSQL. The two main exceptions I can think of are DATAllegro, which tried the same course but switched Ingres, and Infobright, which started from MySQL. Also -- EnterpriseDB, on the mid-range generalist/OLTP side, is of course closely based on PostgreSQL. CAM Lukas,

If you mean the specialty data warehousing guys, you’re absolutely right. At a minimum, Netezza, Vertica, ParAccel, and Greenplum started from PostegreSQL. The two main exceptions I can think of are DATAllegro, which tried the same course but switched Ingres, and Infobright, which started from MySQL.

Also — EnterpriseDB, on the mid-range generalist/OLTP side, is of course closely based on PostgreSQL.

CAM

]]> By: Lukas http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-73332 Lukas Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:51:14 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-73332 Interestingly several of the RDBMS listed in the speciality data category are derived from PostgreSQL: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs.62 Interestingly several of the RDBMS listed in the speciality data category are derived from PostgreSQL:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs.62

]]> By: Curt Monash http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-72830 Curt Monash Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:55:27 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-72830 Ack. Thanks!!! I shall fix promptly. Anyhow, they're the top five posts in the blog. CAM Ack. Thanks!!! I shall fix promptly.

Anyhow, they’re the top five posts in the blog.

CAM

]]> By: Jim http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-72827 Jim Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:44:05 +0000 http://www.dbms2.com/2008/02/15/relational-database-management-categories/#comment-72827 Links to parts 3, 4, and 5 are broken - they keep going back to part 2 Links to parts 3, 4, and 5 are broken - they keep going back to part 2

]]>