 | |
Re: [Info-Ingres] Forrester's Enterprise DBMS report
comp.databases.ingres comp.databases.ingres
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: [Info-Ingres] Forrester's Enterprise DBMS report -
07-13-2009
, 07:08 PM
|
Roy - this isn't a dig at ingres corp I can see that they are trying |
Just be right, or interesting.
--
Roy
UK Ingres User Association Conference 2010 will be on Tuesday June 8 2010
Go to http://www.iua.org.uk/join to get on the mailing list.
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
Emiliano wrote: On 2009-07-13, On net <a@b.com> wrote: Ingres badly needs a USP, or a clear cost advantage. [snip] ..or ingres had some special characteristic/feature or speciality that the others didn't have. Ingres needs that USB and in some evolving technology. |
propositions for INGRES were
1.) INGRES Net (now DAS): The ability to exchange data across platforms
is something that is increasingly a cost burden as it requires a lot of
intervention; if I can install INGRES across my enterprise and
consolidate I can, in most cases, replace much higher cost
aggregation/replication solutions. You can't do this with native
PostgreSQL or MySQL, support subscription (for the latter) or not.
I think this is more relevant now than it was a few years ago.
2.) Simple Backup/Recovery: Having worked in a environment that crammed
stuff down DMF's throat via RAAT <shudder>, I could vouch for INGRES'
backup and recovery integrity and relative ease on both Windows (NT4
even) and Unix (AIX 4.3 even
).3.) Reverse Hybrid x64 GNU/Linux: I created a Sales PoC for INGRES x64
on RHEL4 vs. MSSQL Server 2005 x64 on Windows Server x64 for Service
Desk with a partner in preparation for the Service Desk r11 upgrade. In
short, the cost comparison, inclusive of the support subscription for
INGRES on GNU/Linux and the RHEL4 subscription, was 1/3 of that for
Windows Server 2003 x64 + MSSQL Server 2005 x64 per-socket licensing.
INGRES outperformed MSSQL Server on a 2-socket, dual-core CPU system
with 16GB of RAM because I was able to tune INGRES appropriately. The
angle was the Ingres Corp.'s SI partner would offer a complete "upgrade"
package, inclusive of the services at or below the cost of the Microsoft
licenses alone.
What was great, IMO, was that this was the perfect example of where the
DBMS was merely a repository for the application and there was full,
*pre-existing* support for both INGRES and MSSQL Server. Sold as a
packaged deal, the customer didn't need to worry about what was
persisting the data because they only interacted with the "front-end",
even for administration of the system. The Sales staff understood this
so well, both internally and at the SI partner, that they could repeat
it back to me with integrity. Dirt simple.
Ingres Corp. fumbled this so piss poorly it really soured me and, quite
frankly, I haven't seen much difference in the general business m.o.
since, specifically in the U.S. I know that there *is* much difference
in the U.K., EMEA, and ANZ regions, particularly with regard to
OpenROAD, but the general perception in the U.S., out of the mouth of
people with whom I interact from multiple regions and business and
technology sectors, regard INGRES as "legacy".
I make a consistent effort to different INGRES and OpenROAD as
technologies from Ingres Corp., the Oracle/CA Expat Exec Zone (excluding
the quality Engineers from this slight, of course).
--
Mark R. Winston
www.datavailable.com
#13
| |||
| |||
|
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
... When I used to be involved in discussions about why we should use ingres versus Oracle or Microsoft I was never aware of any definitive way to show that the ingres cost of ownership is significantly better than any of it's rivals, and in the context of having a corporate where oracle and ingres is in place, it's obviously beneficial to squeeze out ingres by offering the stakeholders good deals in respect of the ingres projects. ... The Ingres TCO Calculator at http://www.ingres.com/tco/ shows exactly |
Bodo.
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Jul 14, 12:57 am, On net <a...@b.com> wrote: ... When I used to be involved in discussions about why we should use ingres versus Oracle or Microsoft I was never aware of any definitive way to show that the ingres cost of ownership is significantly better than any of it's rivals, and in the context of having a corporate where oracle and ingres is in place, it's obviously beneficial to squeeze out ingres by offering the stakeholders good deals in respect of the ingres projects. ... The Ingres TCO Calculator at http://www.ingres.com/tco/ shows exactly this. Bodo. |
I wish it had been around when I was having to defend using ingres
rather than Oracle, and still got forced into a migration plan that
delivered no benefit to the end user (or indeed anybody, though I seem
to recollect the initiative was spurred on by a hike in ingres licence
fees in those CA days).
#16
| |||
| |||
|
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have seen and (been victim to) exactly the same tactics from SAP - who seem to get senior management onboard, neatly sidestepping any technical issues completely with a very smooth powerpoint performance. |
I worked a project 10 years ago. We started on Sybase, then moved to
Microsoft. As soon as it was in production, the whole thing was migrated
to Oracle. Where it lives today with some mumble glue to replicate to
downstream Microsoft servers. The hand-crafted stored procedures -- often
written in a peculiar way because of how Microsoft's query "optimizer"
behaved -- were mechanically converted to Oracalese. The result would
make it easy for a camel to win a beauty prize.
I was the senior designer. I developed the load jobs, indexes, views, and
stored procedures. No one ever asked me what the platform should be.
Then there's inertia. Nowadays I work in with a bunch of
quasi-programmers who share a research database. If Ingres came with with
5 years of free support and training *then* it might make sense to
consider switching instead of upgrading. But it's a huge risk and an
enormous undertaking to retrain a small army of people whose job isn't
really databases. The loss in productivity makes switching virtually
impossible absent a compelling stand-out feature.
Tutorial D, anyone?
--jkl
#18
| |||
| |||
|
#19
| |||
| |||
|
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.