Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 Sep 2009 09:39:02 -0500
From:      Andrew Gould <>
Subject:   Re: why no Oracle on FreeBSD ?
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0909251754001.40555@freebsd> <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:28 AM,  <> wrote:
>> That whoever wrote that post is very closed minded, has no problem
>> condemning something prior to investigation, and perhaps wears a pair of
>> glasses that only come in one shade.
> Oracle is an expensive business application that is expected to be VERY
> reliable. It's expected to have a high end support infrastructure behind it.
> This is why they limit the number of operating systems to a very specific
> few, that are backed by companies with a reputation. I'm not vouching for
> them, but most businesses aren't looking to plunk down $50,000 or $100,000
> for a database product for their mission critical application, and run it on
> something that lacks a commercial support infrastructure behind it.
> RedHat is the only reason linux has gotten as far as it has in the heavy
> business and gov't world.
>> I completely and utterly disagree with the claims made in that post.
>> I've been using FreeBSD for nearly 10 years, and I vouch for the fact
>> that FreeBSD has made huge strides during that time. Not only is the OS
>> mature, but so are the people who write it, maintain it, and advocate it.
> While it has, it's still lagging. I can't even get a decent shell from the
> FreeBSD install CD or boot CD. If the installer fails at getting the first
> package, after you re-enter the information to try again, it seems to pick
> up on package #2, skipping the first, which is probably the kernel. I took a
> hiatus(sp) from FreeBSD and when I came back after spending a bunch of time
> in the Linux world, I noticed some pretty sore things.
> I'm not hating on BSD, I'm still kind of meh about Linux, but I can see why
> companies do what they do. A small firm webhosting stuff with MySQL is one
> thing. Large corporations running mission critical databases is another.
> I assume Oracle goes through heavy lengths to certify their product on the
> few OSes they officially support. Probably Solaris, Redhat and their own
> Linux distro. This is a huge deal to them.
> Think of it as an appliance. If you hate Linux, help Solaris. Run your
> oracle on your Solaris system, and hit it from your FreeBSD system.
> I'd be willing to bet there is little to no commercial demand for Oracle on
> FreeBSD. Heck, look at all the SGI went through with Oracle, and the rumors
> were that Oracle ran faster than any other platform on IRIX for a while.
> Oracle wouldn't release it, maybe becuase Ellison and McNealy are BFF or
> something.

...and this, of course, brings us to the purchase of Sun Microsystems
by Oracle.  Expect Oracle to put a lot of emphasis on Solaris in the

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>