can we sell TDengine database to others?
As I know TDengine is free software under AGPL
does that mean I could sell it?
No matter TDengine database or not ,it is a open-source software under AGPL,
it is a free software which means freedom but not free.
you can sell it , but I don't think there will be anyone buying a software from a certain person but not a professional team who develop this software
Related
That this question may seem awkward but I searched for a whole week to know the difference of Netezza and PureData. I appreciate anyone could help me.
If you could provide me a link would be much better.
PureData is a family of IBM products. In the family, there are:
IBM PureData for Analytics - Formerly known as Netezza. It is based on Netezza and is aimed for business intelligence and data warehousing (OLAP) applications.
IBM PureData for Operational Analytics - Formerly known as IBM Smart Analytics System. It is based on DB2 DPF and is aimed for real-time decision making and data warehousing (OLAP) applications.
IBM PureData for Transactions - It is based on DB2 PureScale and is aimed for transactional (OLTP) applications.
IBM PureData for Hadoop - It is based on InfoSphere BigInsights and is aimed for Big Data applications.
The simple answer is that Netezza and PureData System for Analytics (aka PDA) are the same thing.
The longer answer is that Netezza (a company) produced a data warehouse appliance (also commonly referred to as Netezza). IBM acquired Netezza in 2010, and subsequently re-branded the appliance as the PureData System for Analytics. Within IBM the PureData family of systems is an umbrella for their appliances and what they refer to as Expert Integrated Systems.
The software that runs on today's PDA systems is still known as Netezza Performance Server (aka NPS).
This link is somewhat dated, but explains the rebranding simply, and also provides this link to the current product page.
I'm trying to use an old laptop (Win2000 P3 1.1Ghz 256MB ram) as an oracle database server for a small group project of 3/6 people on my college.
I don't need much, just some databases with 2 accounts, 10/15 tables, some views and triggers, however even the simplest database requires 1GB of physical ram (2GB of swap) and the installer refuses to overlook this need.
Is there a simple Oracle server database that I can install on this system without upgrading it?
I would really like to reuse this 9yo laptop as a server since it isn't really doing much besides gathering dust at a corner, but all the software seems to have high requirements for something so simple as a MySQL database.
11g won't install on something this small. Given that a Standard Edition license is a couple of thousand dollars, why try to run it on hardware that is worth a tenth of that cost.
You may be able to use the Express Edition (which has the added advantage of being free to use). The requirements suggest it can barely run on 256 Mb. Personally, I'd spring for a memory upgrade. Stick a note up in the college, as there's probably someone who has done a RAM upgrade on a laptop and has some old chips lying around.
I'd also dump Windows and go for a simple Linux install.
I doubt you can install any current version of Oracle on such a system. Have you considered using Amazon or some other hosting solution? See Need info on Oracle database server
As a developer using DB2 for the first time, I'm not familiar with what the best database performance analysis tools are for it.
I'm wondering what others have found useful in terms of tools that come with DB2, and any third-party tools available for it.
e.g. Anything better than others for things like query planning, CPU measurement, index usage, etc.?
You don't specify which version/release of DB2 you're running, or whether you're running the mainframe (z/OS) version or DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows (also known as DB2 for LUW).
If you're running DB2 on z/OS, talk to your DBA and you'll find out exactly which monitoring and analysis tools have been licensed.
If it's DB2 for LUW you're using, there are various structures and routines you can access directly in DB2 to capture detailed performance information. IBM adds more of these features with each new DB2 release (e.g. version 9.5 vs. 9.7), so be sure to access the version of the documentation for your specific release. Here is the monitoring guide for 9.5 and here is the 9.7 monitoring guide.
The challenge will be to capture and analyze that performance data in some useful way. BMC, CA, DBI, IBM, and even HP have very good third-party tools to help you do that. Some of them are even free.
On the open-source side, monitors from GroundWork Open Source and Hyperic HQ Open Source have some DB2 support, but you'll need to spend some time configuring either of those environments to access your DB2 server.
Many of the tools mentioned above track some combination of DB2 health and performance indicators, and may even alert you when something about DB2 or its underlying server has entered a problem status. You will face choices over what to use as the criteria for triggering alerts, versus the KPIs you simply want to capture without ever alerting.
There are a lot of monitoring tools out there that can be taught how to watch DB2, but one of the most versatile and widely used is RRDtool, either on its own with a collection of custom DB2 scripts, or as part of a Cacti or Munin installation, which automates many (but not all) aspects of working with RRDtool. The goal of RRDtool is to capture any kind of numeric time-series data so it can be rendered into various graphs; it has no built-in alert capabilities. Implementing RRDTool involves choosing and describing the data points you intend to capture and allocating RRDtool data files to store them. I use it a lot to identify baseline performance and resource utilization trends for a database or an application. The PNG bitmaps it produces can be integrated into a wide variety of IT dashboards, provided those dashboards are customizable.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm curious for technical reasons why you choose Oracle database versus the latest flavors of:
1) Microsoft SQL Server
2) MySQL
3) PostgreSQL
What features or functionality justify the extra cost.
I'm interested in technical arguments, not a religious war.
A friend asked me this and I've always used one of the 3 I listed.
I didn't know enough about Oracle Databases to offer an opinion.
Thanks.
Noone seems to talk about the cost of developers time working with Oracle. Most developers who know any other db hate Oracle, those that don't assume that all DB code and/or ORM tools are difficult to use.
If I started a business that I believed was going to scale to Amazon proportions I might consider NoSQL solutions, otherwise I'd choose PostgreSQL, SQL Server (or indeed even Sybase now) over Oracle every time. I say this having worked (as a dev) with Oracle for 2 years - its terrible to work with!
Only Oracle and Microsoft's SQLServer are closed source, and when something goes wrong and you have a problem the answer is just a phone call away (and cash if course). Anyways MySQL and PostGre have several enterprise consulting services but in the end these consultants aren't really resposible for the product, because the product belongs to everyone. Which is great because you can go in and fix the code if you are good with C and relatively lowlevel programming, but if you aren't finding the solution might become a wild goose chase.
Now since not everyone is skilled enough, and those enterprises with money prefer the security (in the business sense) of the closed source databases, is the reason why these solutions haven't gone out of business, besides the fact that their implementations are solid and worth the money if you have it.
Ok now finally the most important difference is between SQLServer and Oracle and that difference is the OS, most people using Windows will stick with, you guessed it, SQLServer, but if you run on flavors of Unix Oracle is your closed source solution. Anyways I use Oracle on Solaris, but if our target were Windows I would probably use SQLServer because both products are rock solid, but I trust Microsoft has some special tricks under the hood to get the best performance on windows.
Just to name a few:
Oracle Real Application Cluster - provides advanced clustering features
Oracle Data Guard - in short provides physical and logical stand-by features.
Oracle Exadata - implements the database aware storage (that can do predicate filtering, column projection filtering, join processing, hastens tablespace creation). The solution comes with HP servers, full 24/7 warranty, and other nice things. It's quite nice for applications with highly intensive data loading (for example thanks to the independent tablespace creation).
Oracle Virtualization
And of course the magic of the brand ;)
And when it comes to choosing the RDBMS? Usually the choice is pretty obvious - Oracle or the rest of the world. After that you can narrow the choice down by:
platform (windows-only or not)
weight (sqlite, MySQL, PostgreSQL, ...)
budget (initial license cost, maintenance + support cost)
evolution perspectives, for example:
Oracle Express -> Oracle
SQL Server Express -> MSSQL
business perspectives - "secure, well known product" or open-source product (bear in mind the quotation around the first phrase). Other post tends to look deeper into this aspect.
The real question is, what kind of application is going to be used to make use of a RDMS. You certainly don't need oracle for your wordpress blog or twitter clone. But if you want to do some heavy business intelligence, then Oracle might have some features which can help doing that more efficiently than the others.
Ms sql server is very good aswell, it has tons of features. If you are struck on linux and you need a database with features as offered by ms sql, then oracle would be a good pick.
I think it's because Oracle was the first RDMS that supported "sharding"
The costs of SQL Server and Oracle are not that far apart, you know.
In fact for small systems the cost of Oracle vs Your Favourite Free Database is between zero (Oracle Express Edition) and not-very-big ($5,800 processor perpetual for Standard Edition One).
Here's a link to the capabilities of the various editions in 11g: http://www.oracle.com/database/product_editions.html.
List prices are available for all territories at http://store.oracle.com -- typically large companies do not pay retail, of course ;)
I'm starting a new project here (Windows Forms). What's the best option today for a small (free as in beer) DBMS?
I've used SQL Server Express on the past projects, but time and time again I hear people saying that the product from Oracle is faster and more powerful.
It will be used in a small company (around 20 users) and will not reach the 4 GB limit any time soon :)
I don't want to start a flame war on my first post, so please point me to some link showing a good (and actual) comparison between the 2 products, if possible.
PS: I've heard about IBM DB2 Express too, but I coudn't find any information about it. (Marketing material from IBM doesn't count :) )
I would go for the SQL Server Express solution, unless you absolutely have to use a feature in Oracle that SQL Server does not have and you have no usable workaround.
Example of Oracle's strengths:
Analytical Functions in Oracle ROCK!
PL/SQL is better than T-SQL.
If you're going to scale up the system to 1,000's of users all updating the same small dataset
You scale upto multi-TB databases,
You need to scale to need big numbers of CPU's in your server (over 8).
need instant failover (RAC)
you really cannot afford to lose a transaction.
Maybe you can tell, I'm a big Oracle fan! But I think that Oracle Express is a commercial reaction to SQL Server Express and I don't think Oracle really deep deep down likes it.
You know with SQL Server that there is an upgrade path (SQL Server 2008 is soon) plus service packs.
SQL Express is also more "install and forget" than Oracle.
and it will integrate better with your IDE (if your using .NET)
In terms of speed, both are going to be lighting quick with such a small dataset size.
It would be hard to argue either way given the needs you outlined, that either would shine over the other.
What I will say is this:
You say you are already familar with SSExpress, then that is a good reason to stick with it
IMHO the tools with SSExpress are superior and easier to use than the Oracle equivalent
That said, I have much more experience with SS than Oracle so YMMV.
Sorry, no link, but one advice. Because we support Oracle and SQL Server, I know that getting fixes for the 'normal' Oracle database, is not something what I call fun. You have to pay for it, and if you have no tool which updates your Oracle system for you, it's a pain in the a.., if you ask me. Check out how the Oracle XE is supported with updates/fixes. I don't know, I only use the 'normal' Oracle (Developer) database.
I think it's great to rethink things every once in a while and that it's very smart to consider alternative products when you are at a junction to do so.
If you are comfortable optimizing systems and are dba level in skills, I'd consider PostgreSQL. I do not consider myself a dba and have middling database skills and find SQL Server Express extremely easy to use. Also, I've had products exceed the limits of SQL Server Express - the transition to SQL Server Standard/Enterprise is seemless.
I realize that this doesn't matter at a technical level, but Larry Ellison buys jets and prostitutes with his profit. Bill Gates is solving problems of immense importance to humanity with his. All things being equal, I always prefer to give my money to Bill Gates.
Is this any use:
https://web.archive.org/web/1/http://downloads.techrepublic%2ecom%2ecom/5138-9592-6028761.html
NB Registration is required
Both of KiwiBastard's points are very good and I completely agree with him.
If you really want a free alternative that is similar to MS SQL and supports growth should you need it, you could have a look at MySQL or PostgreSQL. SQLite also seems a good choice.
Surely you can afford an old Linux server if you work in a company with 20 employees.
100% SQL Express, more easy to install and maintain than Oracle.
IMHO the major problem with SQL Server, has for a long time been, no multi-version read consistency. Fortunately this has been corrected since SQL Server 2005 with the snapshot isolation level.
If your looking for a good RDBMS for a small project requring minimal knowledge for maintenance, SQL Server Express Edition is a good pick. The SQL Server Express Edition UI is much easier to understand than RMAN or the "easier"-to-use backup scripts included with Oracle Database XE which requires offlining your database.
Oracle Database XE is on my *** list. They recently released an ODBC driver for Linux that wasn't compiled properly (ld returns missing symbols for required ODBC functions) to be at all usable (10.2.0.4). With this kind of lack of attention to any reasonable amount of QA even for a 'free' product I would think twice about going down that road.
For DB2 Express-C see:
"DB2 Express-C™ is the free version of one of the most advanced
database management systems in the world. Why pay when you can have
all you need for free? DB2 Express-C is free to develop, deploy and
distribute.
It is a fast, secure, reliable, and amazingly scalable dataserver,
ideal for most startups and small/medium sized businesses. DB2
Express-C 9.7 is available on Linux, Unix, Windows, and now Mac OS X
as well! It also enables developers to easily handle XML through the
native storage technology called pureXML™. Whether you develop in
Java, .Net, Ruby, Python, Perl or pretty much any other programming
language out there, DB2 can be your technological advantage."