Thread

1. Looking at PostgreSQL as alternative to MS SQL Server 2000

   Ian J. <yahoo@ijvfilms.co.uk> — 2003-04-29T16:44:54Z

   Hi all,
   
   I'm completely new to PostgreSQL, so please excuse my lack of knowledge
   regarding what is and isn't possible.
   
   I'm looking for alternatives to Microsoft's SQL Server 2000 for
   implementation on my various clients' systems, which in the main are
   Windows boxes (NT and 2000, Workstations and/or Servers).
   
   I've looked up various SQL databases, both commercial and 'free'. I have
   concluded that the commercial ones are too expensive (for my clients,
   that is. They don't like the idea of several thousand pounds up front,
   together with a couple of hundred to allow each client machine to
   connect. This means I'm losing potential business). Of the various
   'free' ones, it seems only PostgreSQL has the power and functionality to
   handle the kind of requests that might end up being thrown at it (MySQL
   seems to me to be not much more than a backend data store at the moment,
   meaning too much validation, etc, would have to be done on the client
   end. I'm willing to be proven wrong about my assumption regarding it
   though. Similar issues surround other server SQL DBs too, as far as I
   can tell).
   
   So, from what I gather of the PostgreSQL info on the site, it seems
   there is currently no installable Windows version of the program. Is
   this correct? Also, there seem to be two Windows alternatives available:
   A Cygwin version, and a C++ version (for version 7.3.2).
   
   I don't like the idea of a Cygwin version, as it seems that the program
   is slower because Cygwin is acting as a Unix emulator on Windows. This
   will hog valuable resources (most machines it might go on will not be
   brand new high end servers!) There is also the issue that I am not at
   all familiar with Unix, so setting it up would be impossible using a
   Unix interface.
   
   I am therefore looking at the C++ binaries, I think. Once compiled using
   Visual C++ (which version, 6.0 or .Net?), what am I left with? I know I
   will have to develop the front end myself, but what or how is the
   PostgreSQL implmented on the Windows 'server' box?
   
   I presume the standard C++ data connection methods are used to
   communicate to the server. I gather that ASP is not available to
   communicate from a web point of view, so php would be the alternative?
   
   Any help, particularly pointers to clear and helpful guides on using
   PostgreSQL in the above C++ manner, would be much appreciated.
   
   If it isn't 'the done thing' to use PostgreSQL in the way I'm planning
   (effectively to provide it to clients, though obviously I wouldn't (and
   don't believe the Open License allows me) to charge them for it), then
   please let me know. I'm not out to offend either the Open Source or
   closed source communities - I'm just trying to make things cheaper, and
   perhaps better, for my clients.
   
   Regards,
   
   Ian J.
   

2. Re: Looking at PostgreSQL as alternative to MS SQL Server 2000

   ghaverla@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca — 2003-04-29T16:57:57Z

   On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Ian J. wrote:
   
   > I'm completely new to PostgreSQL, so please excuse my lack of knowledge
   > regarding what is and isn't possible.
   > 
   > I'm looking for alternatives to Microsoft's SQL Server 2000 for
   > implementation on my various clients' systems, which in the main are
   > Windows boxes (NT and 2000, Workstations and/or Servers).
   
   One thing I would look into, does the database have to sit
   on a Windows box?  If all your client cares about, is that
   the front-end applications are on Windows and that the
   database understands ODBC, you may be able to put PostgreSQL
   (or other) on a more native OS than Windows.
   
   Gord
   
   
   

3. Re: Looking at PostgreSQL as alternative to MS SQL Server 2000

   Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> — 2003-04-29T19:51:32Z

   Iann,
   
   > seems to me to be not much more than a backend data store at the moment,
   > meaning too much validation, etc, would have to be done on the client
   > end. I'm willing to be proven wrong about my assumption regarding it
   > though. Similar issues surround other server SQL DBs too, as far as I
   > can tell).
   
   Not that PostgreSQL isn't superior <grin>, but you should also check out 
   SAP-DB and Firebird (formerly Interbase Open Source), which are full-services 
   OSS databases.
   
   > So, from what I gather of the PostgreSQL info on the site, it seems
   > there is currently no installable Windows version of the program. Is
   > this correct? Also, there seem to be two Windows alternatives available:
   > A Cygwin version, and a C++ version (for version 7.3.2).
   
   Correct.  The Windows "port" of PostgreSQL is still in development and is 
   expected to the stable in a few months.   If you can wait 'til 
   August-September for real development, then you're fine.
   
   > I presume the standard C++ data connection methods are used to
   > communicate to the server. I gather that ASP is not available to
   > communicate from a web point of view, so php would be the alternative?
   
   There are all sorts of reasons not to use ASP, but lack of PostgreSQL 
   compatibility isn't one of them.  You can use ASP + pgODBC if you like.
   
   > If it isn't 'the done thing' to use PostgreSQL in the way I'm planning
   > (effectively to provide it to clients, though obviously I wouldn't (and
   > don't believe the Open License allows me) to charge them for it), then
   > please let me know. I'm not out to offend either the Open Source or
   > closed source communities - I'm just trying to make things cheaper, and
   > perhaps better, for my clients.
   
   You are welcome (even encouraged) to charge whatever you want for PostgreSQL 
   service and development.   The license even allows you to charge for 
   PostgreSQL itself, you just have to look for gullable clients who don't know 
   they can download it for free.  For that matter, you can "roll up" PostgreSQL 
   as a component of a larger proprietary system and charge for that ... the 
   license doesn't prevent you.   Heck, it's how I make a living.
   
   -- 
   -Josh Berkus
    Aglio Database Solutions
    San Francisco
   
   
   

4. Re: Looking at PostgreSQL as alternative to MS SQL Server

   Ben Clewett <b.clewett@roadrunner.uk.com> — 2003-04-30T08:21:06Z

   Josh Berkus wrote:
   
   > There are all sorts of reasons not to use ASP, but lack of PostgreSQL 
   > compatibility isn't one of them.  You can use ASP + pgODBC if you like.
   
   Josh,
   
   I am interested to know why you consider ASP not worth it?
   
   I have never yet used this, I like c++ for CGI coding as it's fast, 
   secure if correctly used and powerful.  It also takes a long time to 
   code and my be buggy.
   
   With increased performance in OS platforms available, and the ability to 
   cast much of the processing into PostgreSQL procedures, I have been 
   looking into ASP.NET (with Npgsql), which although a little slow, and 
   seems to turn a thin client Browser into a thick client Javascript 
   encyclopaedia:  It does seem to have the ability to quickly produce 
   relatively bug free code which presents it self well.  Which is a 
   commercial environment can be deceptively inviting.
   
   Or maybe this is like the Greek Mythological Sirens.  The song of 
   Microsoft calling programmers to steer their projects towards their 
   beautiful singing, only to smash their applications against the rocks 
   with the loss of all life...