Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 9 Aug 1999 21:30:08 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        garbanzo@hooked.net (Alex Zepeda)
Cc:        tlambert@primenet.com, BMCGROARTY@high-voltage.com, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Oracle for FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <199908092130.OAA16268@usr06.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.990808215401.21271A-100000@fish.hooked.net> from "Alex Zepeda" at Aug 8, 99 09:58:09 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > There is already a FreeBSD port of Oracle.  It runs on Oracle's
> > (NCI's) FreeBSD based Network Computer server.
> > 
> > It also runs on FreeBSD-current, if you tar it up and untar it,
> > as someone who shall remain nameless has done to see if there
> > were OS specific hooks built into the NC server FreeBSD kernel to
> > support the database (there weren't).
> > 
> > 
> > It's a matter of leveraging a big company that needs it (e.g. Yahoo)
> > to get it released as a supported product on FreeBSD in general,
> > instead of merely as a component of their NC server.
> > 
> > It needs a corporate sponsor.
> 
> Yes, I've heard you mention this *numerous* times before; but that's why I
> think a boxed version of this would be cool.  It wouldn't be hard to
> actually create, and would create something for VARs to sell that actually
> includes added value.


The thing is, there isn't going to be the possiblity of boxing
both FreeBSD and "Oracle for FreeBSD" together, unless "Oracle for
FreeBSD" is made available first.

There is a crying need for a large Oracle user, FreeBSD user, or
both, to commit to a large enough unit purchase to cause the product
to be supported.

Since Oracle uses the product internally, this is clearly an issue
of amortization of support costs, particularly including the
increased supoort costs associated with active platform developement
taking place (Oracle can be guaranteed that, on their release of
FreeBSD, that the product will remain relatively stable).

This is clearly an API mutability and product life cycle issue.


The tack to take seems to me to be to ensure that the "big user"
that the advocates get to come forward specify a particular FreeBSD
-RELEASE on which the software is supported, and guarantee that
there is no support that Oracle will have to put up with for any
more recent platform releases and/or -STABLE versions which later
occur.

By far, the largest exposure for a commercial company considering
a port to any platform is the risk that the platform will change,
and cause the software not to run.  I rememebr a concrete example
of this, when SCO changed the tty ring buffers from 32 to 24
characters on Xenix 3.1; this change broke a lot of software that
was running the buffers at greater than 24 characters per lbolt.



					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908092130.OAA16268>