Changing From Oracle To PostgreSQL

“For those customers who want to transition their applications from Oracle or SQL Server to Amazon Aurora or any of the open source engines supported in Amazon RDS (MySQL, PostgreSQL, and MariaDB), the AWS Schema Conversion Tool converts database schemas and stored procedures from one database platform to another.
 
“Hundreds of customers moved more than a thousand of their on-premises databases to Amazon Aurora, other Amazon RDS engines, or databases running on Amazon EC2 during the preview of the AWS Database Migration Service,” said Hal Berenson, Vice President, Relational Database Services, AWS. “Customers repeatedly told us they wanted help moving their on-premises databases to AWS, and also moving to more open database engine options, but the response to the AWS Database Migration Service has been even stronger than we expected. In the preview, one-third of the database migrations used the AWS Database Migration Service to not only move databases to the AWS Cloud, but also to switch database engines in the process.””
 
See Amazon Web Services Announces that over 1,000 Databases Have Migrated to AWS since January 1, 2016
Recent discussions here included a thread about the chances of users of Oracle escaping to PostgreSQL. Apparently, there are enough people doing it that Amazon provides a migration service for databases to its cloud with the capability to do most of the changes needed automatically. They would not have done that if there weren’t a demand. Amazon is in business to make money, not to promote FLOSS.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

105 Responses to Changing From Oracle To PostgreSQL

  1. oiaohm says:

    MariaDB 10.1.11 users might want to avoid upgrading to Kodi v16 until they have updated MairaDB to 10.1.12
    This is from http://kodi.wiki/view/MySQL Roberts link.

    So Kodi deploys on MariaDB and MySQL without any clear numbers on what percentage is MariaDB or MySQL. Yes MariaDB in fact provides libmysqlclient .so in direct competition to MySQL own version.
    https://mariadb.org/information-on-the-ssl-connection-vulnerability-of-mysql-and-mariadb-2/ came out clearly if you had been following security bugs.

    And so what? I notice that you continue to refer to it by the Oracle name, MySQL, Robert.
    DrLoser exactly what Robert has done shows exactly the problem in fact working out clearly how much MariaDB is deployed. Due to both databases having the same interfaces the first in existence gets referred to more often and that is not that is most used.

    ownCloud default images are MariaDB not Mysql. More and more you look around you find stuff like this. Mysql since Oracle took over has lost huge number of places being default.

    Dr Loser thing is Robert had a old number that he pulled in on a Cite that should not exactly be trusted. But then you go and presume that Postgresql is less without a valid cite. I have Postgresql information that show pure Postgresql at less than 12 million but the deployment numbers of Postgresql with closed/GPL extensions is way larger than 12 million.

    This is your level of incompetence Dr Loser you should have pointed out that Roberts Mysql numbers are old and suspect and been smart enough not to take a swing at Postgresql using them. I will say that there is no question that Mysql compatible databases out number Postgresql. In fact Mysql compatible databases out number Oracle and SQL Server numbers combined.

    Problem here most Mysql compatible databases deployments are not paying anyone for support or licenses directly for databases instead paying the likes of Redhat for generic all round Linux support.

    https://www.certdepot.net/rhel7-backup-restore-mariadb-database/

    Really to bring the serous point down to how strange this is. To get your Redhat or SUSE certification you have to be able to operate mariadb. So you ask for someone with Redhat or SUSE certification or equal in a job application and you don’t have to ask for Mariadb skill set. This throws one of the DB survey on usage using job lists way out.

    You will also find PostgreSQL is also in the exams. Mysql from Oracle is no longer requirement of SUSE or Redhat examinations so of course it has to be listed in Job applications a little more.

    In open source databases is extremely hard to work out usage figures per database. Per database class is a lot simpler like Mysql Compatible, Postgresql Compatible and so on. Of course those making closed source databases don’t want to say 40-60+ percent of the database usage is Mysql Compatible databases. Or that Postgresql Compatible is between 20-30. With them fighting over the high paying 40-10 percent. Once you see this your wake up closed source databases are not exactly in the most stable location. 25 percent of per database paid support is for FOSS databases of some form for supporting databases alone. Yes less than 1/4 of deployed FOSS databases are support in a per database way. About 1/2 of FOSS databases are support by the likes of Redhat as part of solution support and about 1/4 are not supported by a third party but depend on internal staff of the company. There are survey numbers done over the years showing these percentages.

    Thing to remember why FOSS Database is different is those providing solution support don’t have to pay the likes of Oracle or Microsoft to be able to get modifications upstream and the customer does not have to by support licenses from the likes of Oracle or Microsoft. So companies using FOSS databases normally want staff certified as compatible with there paid for support company not the database they use.

    The reality is FOSS databases over took closed source databases in market share years ago just the shoe of reality has not dropped on closed source databases yet. Why has the shoe not dropped yet Closed source databases had some specialist features that the FOSS databases did not have. Problem this is changing. Biggest specialist feature is safe multi-master.

    Postgresql eating into Oracle is not going after number 1 deployed database its more a clean up job.

  2. Dr Loser says:

    Dr Loser time to put up where is your cite backing the 12 million claim???

    Fair cop, Princess. It was one of Robert’s.

    Jeez, you people are so incredibly, continually, carelessly, stupid that it’s a wonder you can tie your own shoelaces in the morning.

  3. Dr Loser says:

    So, there could be many millions of living rooms with MySQL in use.

    And so what? I notice that you continue to refer to it by the Oracle name, MySQL, Robert.

    Would you care to speculate on why that might be?

  4. oiaohm wrote, “Reason kde and a few other desktop things depend on the presence of something mysql compatible and since distributions are default to MariaDB say hello to huge market share from nothing. So Mysql 12 million is basically nothing.”

    Even settop boxes run MySQL. XBMC/KODI depends on libmysqlclient. KODI uses MySQL for shareable libraries of media. So, there could be many millions of living rooms with MySQL in use.

  5. DeafSpy says:

    Shut up, Fifi. You’re not entitled to speak until you apologize for writeln().

  6. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser there is a useful number.
    It documented 11+ percent of Linux users have postgresql core installed by distribution package documented by Debian.
    https://www.linuxcounter.net/statistics
    That gets us to 8 million+. That does not cover any of the modified versions. Like enterprise db does not install by general package management.

    Reality if you look at package management deployment information MariaDB is around 40-60 percent. Reason kde and a few other desktop things depend on the presence of something mysql compatible and since distributions are default to MariaDB say hello to huge market share from nothing. So Mysql 12 million is basically nothing.

    So the claim that Mysql is the number 1 open source database is very questionable. Marketing information from Mysql is old and out of date and written before MariaDB existed and does not line up with package installation popularity information..

    Yes Mysql compatible is huge. But all third party traceable install number suggest Mysql is small fish compared to MariaDB in marketshare.

  7. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy shut up about the casting stuff and go read the SQL standard on casting and error handing.

    The reality is any cast is by Standard:
    1 Database Dependant
    2 Dependent on what locale the database is set to for text to numbers.
    3 Dependent if database allows it.
    4 return 0 in value in integer value with a SQL error message set is in fact SQL standard. A lot of people do fail to do the extra calls to pick up SQL errors.

    I think WordPress changes the inverted commas and I can’t paste the exact characters here.

    What happens is that MySQL returns a zero – 0. Documentation states clearly that casting to UNSIGNED returns a big (64-bit) integer. The input value, despite a string, is a numeric value within the range of a signed 32-bit integer.

    So basically Deaf Spy you have described something behaving as per SQL standard. So nothing wrong other than you being incompetent.

  8. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser time to put up where is your cite backing the 12 million claim??? Come on. When you read it closer you will see your incompetence.

  9. Dr Loser says:

    This is the problem. Postgresql is not sold under one name.

    Go away, Fifi. Your incessant grovelling for irrelevant cites on Google is becoming tiresome.

  10. oiaohm says:

    3) Taken at face value, this strongly suggests that the installed base of active installations of PostgreSQL (need I remind you that I like and admire PostreSQL) is under 12 million.
    Dr Loser sorry reality is Postgresql is well over 12 million deployments. . Pure Postgresql is under 12 million true. You missed the fact that number is pure and the fact most Postgresql deployments are not pure.
    https://www.citusdata.com/blog/17-ozgun-erdogan/403-citus-unforks-postgresql-goes-open-source
    This is the problem. Postgresql is not sold under one name. So company using current citus is using core Postgresql with extension. This is in fact quite common with Postgresql to be paying for Postgresql under some other name than Postgresql.

    Note citrusdb is not a pure Postgresql a long with many other Postgresql solutions so not counted in the under 12 million number you found. Pure Postgresql deployments make up less than 5 percent of Postgresql deployments.

    The size of Postgresql market share is quite effectively hidden unless you go intentionally looking for it due to its multi-able naming and the fact not 100 percent pure solutions no longer get counted even if the impure parts are still open source.

    Little things in implementations.
    https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/UPSERT
    Like the fact Upsert in fact works in Postgresql without doing strangeness as Oracle, SQL Server or Mysql/Mariadb solution can. Do resulting is different users migrating to Postgresql based solutions from all 3 happen.

    The next database by survey companies are likely to use after mysql or Oracle is something Postgresql. The reality is Postgresql is number 3 and SQL Server is number 4. A lot of sites get that backwards due to Postgresql multi branding.

    https://seravo.fi/2015/10-reasons-to-migrate-to-mariadb-if-still-using-mysql
    Is it really such a good thing, if MySQL is “the world’s most popular open source database software?”
    Maybe it is Maybe its not. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7+and SUSE Enterprise Linux 12+ for example defaults to Mariadb over Mysql in fact defaults to installing Mariadb when you request to install Mysql. Of course those writing applications don’t notice the difference most of the time.

    Correct way to put this MySQL related databases are the most popular class of open source databases. Saying MySQL it self is the most popular is opening self up for a major issues because there are no real solid numbers to confirm that in fact there is a lot of things to suggest users will be reporting using Mysql when in fact using Mariadb.

    Major deployments of Mysql have also been converted to Mariadb. Postgresql gets clients who were using Mysql but they don’t get Mariadb as simply. Why Mariadb properly horizontally scales as mainline code.

    Postgresql class of databases is the second most popular class of open source database at this stage. Do expect to see more unforking as outside patches to work around different Postgresql performance issues become pointless.

  11. Dr Loser says:

    On reflection, I am actually impressed by that result. I’m sure you can tell me why I am impressed.

    Now, let’s assume that you don’t simply wish to eyeball the result — I can’t imagine why you would want to do so. Let’s assume that you want to use that result in a computer program.

    Say, Pascal.

    Which type would you expect to be able to store it in?

  12. Dr Loser says:

    All that babble to one side, Robert, the fact remains that you cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer. Not very long ago, either.

    The gory details of this are open for all to see:

    Works for me:
    select cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED);
    +——————————+
    | cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED) |
    +——————————+
    | 1073741824 |
    +——————————+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    It’s pretty plain that you are casting an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer, Robert. No weasel excuses, please.

    Oh, and you didn’t even stop there, did you?

    Heck, even this works. I’m impressed…
    select 13556735357*cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED);
    +——————————————+
    | 13556735357*cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED) |
    +——————————————+
    | 14556433749710471168 |
    +——————————————+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    You’re “impressed” by a 64-bit integer calculation, Robert?

    It doesn’t take much to impress you, does it?

  13. DrLoser wrote, “that’s not what your little bit of MySQL did, is it, Robert? Your little bit of MySQL cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer.”

    Let’s see:
    “create table junk (s text character set utf8);
    Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.19 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> describe junk;
    +——-+——+——+—–+———+——-+
    | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
    +——-+——+——+—–+———+——-+
    | s | text | YES | | NULL | |
    +——-+——+——+—–+———+——-+”

    See “s” there? That’s not an unsigned integer. It’s text, characters.

    “insert into junk set s=”1073741824‬”;
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.07 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> select * from junk where s=’‭1073741824‬’;
    Empty set (0.00 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> select * from junk ;
    +—————+
    | s |
    +—————+
    | 1073741824‬ |
    +—————+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)”

    followed by
    “select cast(s as unsigned) from junk ;
    +———————+
    | cast(s as unsigned) |
    +———————+
    | 1073741824 |
    +———————+”

    See? MySQL did cast some characters as UNSIGNED. Now, what’s your point?

    DrLoser also wrote, “The point Deaf Spy is making, I think, is that when said cast fails, the user is entitled to expect some reasonable provision of information regarding the failure.”

    My system stops on errors and hides warnings by default. You can turn those on if you want. It’s still silly to cast characters as integers for no purpose. You get what you want and with the various combinations of character codings and variable-types, it can be poorly defined. Zero is an unsigned integer, just not the one YOU want. Do things properly and MySQL will do the job. Take any documentation out of context and you can reveal a bug, like sqrt(X) gives the square root of X but not if X is negative. Omit that part and you could get confusing results. If MySQL sees a character string that does not look like an integer, CAST will give funny results. That’s why you should avoid using CAST except as a last resort and certainly not to convert strings to integers when the system has a perfectly valid representation of integers to begin.

    “A string is a sequence of bytes or characters, enclosed within either single quote (“’”) or double quote (“””) characters.”

    “Integers are represented as a sequence of digits. Numbers may include “.” as a decimal separator.”

  14. Dr Loser says:

    Any good reason to cast a string as an integer when you already know its value?

    But that’s not what your little bit of MySQL did, is it, Robert? Your little bit of MySQL cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer.

    You can’t get away from that. It’s a cold hard fact. Any good reason to cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer?

    It seems only yesterday he was denigrating the possibility of using characters as indices…

    Really? In which parallel universe did this “yesterday” exist? I have never once said any such thing.

    Besides, the choice of type to use as the basis of an index … whatever choice of type you make … whether or not I “denigrate” it … is also totally irrelevant to the question of how Database X chooses to represent a cast from one type to another.

    now he wants to use them as integers when we have integers…

    You’re really losing it on this one, old chum. I have never once expressed any such desire.

    Leaving aside your proven total incompetence in attempting to prove a theory about MySQL (an Oracle product), you are still trying to evade the obvious reality of common or garden database usage.

    This reality being: if a database schema defines a column as a string, and the user actually wants the result from (say) a SQL query as an integer, then the database is expected to provide a robust mechanism for converting, or “casting” — an inappropriate term, but it’s the one that many databases use — said string into an integer.

    The point Deaf Spy is making, I think, is that when said cast fails, the user is entitled to expect some reasonable provision of information regarding the failure.

    Not just a silent “Zero — it passes!”

  15. DrLoser wrote, “Any good reason to cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer, publish the results, and then somehow crow about them, Robert?”

    Any good reason to cast a string as an integer when you already know its value? It seems only yesterday he was denigrating the possibility of using characters as indices… now he wants to use them as integers when we have integers… The mind boggles. Maybe he will sleep it off.

  16. Dr Loser says:

    To be fair, you are welcome to admit your incompetence in any other IT domain whatsoever.

    Incidentally, and on the assumption that you won’t admit to the obvious truth — which particular IT domain would you sell your skills at, in 2016?

    SysAdmin? Programming? DevOps? Web development?

    Your choice, Robert. Your choice.

  17. Dr Loser says:

    Any good reason to cast an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer, publish the results, and then somehow crow about them, Robert?

    I thought not.

    Kindly admit that you are a complete incompetent in this particular domain.

  18. Dr Loser says:

    I suspect that Deaf Spy’s point was as follows. Who knows? I just picked this at random out of his answers to you. But here, I think, is the salient point:

    What happens is that MySQL returns a zero – 0.

    Naturally, Robert, you have a rebuttal to this.

    Or, perhaps, not. Because that is what MySQL does.

  19. Dr Loser says:

    Aha! A point! I thought it was all pointless.

    And that cast from an unsigned integer to another unsigned integer? How pointless would that be, Robert?

    Explain that, you ignorant old fool.

  20. Deaf Spy wrote, “Point is that MySQL fails to comply with its own documentation, and silently returns a zero instead of failing.”

    Aha! A point! I thought it was all pointless. The problems with strings is that one has to verify that the character set and codes actually imply a string is an integer. Are you making any sense to cast “cow” or “dog” as integers? BTW, “0” is a good unsigned integer so the documentation is not wrong just incomplete at that point. You are taking this operation out of context. The documentation of MySQL also says how to handle strings properly.

    e.g.
    create table junk (s text character set utf8);
    Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.19 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> describe junk;
    +-------+------+------+-----+---------+-------+
    | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
    +-------+------+------+-----+---------+-------+
    | s | text | YES | | NULL | |
    +-------+------+------+-----+---------+-------+
    1 row in set (0.05 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> insert into junk set s="1073741824‬";
    Query OK, 1 row affected (0.07 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> select * from junk where s='‭1073741824‬';
    Empty set (0.00 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> select * from junk ;
    +---------------+
    | s |
    +---------------+
    | 1073741824‬ |
    +---------------+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    MariaDB [notes]> select cast(s as unsigned) from junk ;
    +---------------------+
    | cast(s as unsigned) |
    +---------------------+
    | 1073741824 |
    +---------------------+
    1 row in set, 1 warning (0.00 sec)
    select cast(s as unsigned)*3 from junk ;
    +-----------------------+
    | cast(s as unsigned)*3 |
    +-----------------------+
    | 3221225472 |
    +-----------------------+
    1 row in set, 1 warning (0.02 sec)

    Further,
    select cast(s as unsigned)*3,cast("1073741824‬" as unsigned)*3 from junk;
    +-----------------------+-------------------------------------+
    | cast(s as unsigned)*3 | cast("1073741824‬" as unsigned)*3 |
    +-----------------------+-------------------------------------+
    | 3221225472 | 3221225472 |
    +-----------------------+-------------------------------------+
    1 row in set, 2 warnings (0.00 sec)

    So, what’s your point?

  21. Dr Loser says:

    Works for me … [proceeds to cast an unsigned integer as an unsigned integer]

    That’s rather a pitiful mistake to make if you are a sworn proponent of a strongly-typed language such as Pascal, isn’t it, Robert?

    Going on to praise an API for casting an unsigned integer into an unsigned integer is actually so pitiful that it suggests you don’t really have a clue how to use the free tools so abundantly provided to you.

    Which reminds me. How is the Holy Fight against systemd going?

  22. Dr Loser says:

    Something quite interesting: Developer “unpublishes” his code.

    I should have a go at GitHub if I were you, Robert. There is no Fifth Freedom …

    “All developers must be free to toss their toys out of the pram when threatened by a lawyer.”

    (Well, actually, apparently, there is …)

  23. Dr Loser says:

    MySQL is the world’s most popular open source database software, with over 12 million active installations and over 2000 ISV / OEM customers.

    1) That is a quote from the MySQL website — which incidentally is now presumably owned by Oracle, your friendly RDBMS corporate giant — and hence should be taken with a pinch of salt.
    2) Is it really such a good thing, if MySQL is “the world’s most popular open source database software?”
    3) Taken at face value, this strongly suggests that the installed base of active installations of PostgreSQL (need I remind you that I like and admire PostreSQL) is under 12 million.

    Is there any particular reason why you take so much joy in shooting both your feet off, Robert?

  24. Dr Loser says:

    What exactly is it that you want mysql to do? Convert a string to an integer? Why?

    Ummmm … because that’s what all other DB interfaces do, Robert. Like it or not (and I don’t, particularly) this is what people expect.

    The way various DBs treat NULLs is, ahem, interesting. You’ll be pleased to know that most people object to the SQL Server approach. From memory, the C-ISAM approach was equally as annoying. (Or it might have been the Informix RDBMS, I can’t remember.)

  25. DeafSpy says:

    Something quite interesting:
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/?mt=1458834199582

    This is what can happen when you rely all your infrastructure on ill-supported open projects.

  26. DeafSpy says:

    I think WordPress changes the inverted commas and I can’t paste the exact characters here.

    What happens is that MySQL returns a zero – 0. Documentation states clearly that casting to UNSIGNED returns a big (64-bit) integer. The input value, despite a string, is a numeric value within the range of a signed 32-bit integer.

    It doesn’t matter why I do this. I have to. There is a system which we now have to support (developed by another company at another time), where a huge part of the BL is in the database.

    Point is that MySQL fails to comply with its own documentation, and silently returns a zero instead of failing.

  27. Deaf Spy wrote, ” Try exactly the syntax I gave you in MySQL or MariaDB.
     
    select cast(‘‭1073741824‬’ as UNSIGNED)”

    It doesn’t work. You have errors:
    “ERROR 1054 (42S22): Unknown column ‘‘‭1073741824‬’’ in ‘field list'” and you need a ; at the end.

    What exactly is it that you want mysql to do? Convert a string to an integer? Why? If you know the value, just enter it as an integer, silly. MySQL also can’t dance the rumba. So what? It does a lot of other things very well.

    “MySQL is the world’s most popular open source database software, with over 12 million active installations and over 2000 ISV / OEM customers. It’s designed to help keep product costs low over products’ lifecycle but also offers the performance, reliability and scalability necessary for even the most demanding applications, including Telco, Network Management and many of the world’s largest Web properties.” See https://www.mysql.com/why-mysql/topreasons_vp.html

  28. Deaf Spy says:

    No, Robert. Not PostgreSql. Try exactly the syntax I gave you in MySQL or MariaDB.

    select cast(‘‭1073741824‬’ as UNSIGNED)

    The inverted commas are an important part of the drama.

    Or, is the new song
    “PostgreSQL is the greatest database in the world
    all other databases are created by little girls.
    PostgreSQL number one data type supporter,
    all other databases support in theory data types”.

    Go on, Robert, admit MySQL is good for nothing but forums and simple CMS. 🙂

  29. Wizard Emeritus wrote, “Shouldn’t that be: ‘1073741824’
    you left out the ‘ ‘”

    Nope. You have to consider syntax. Why should I convert a string to binary that way?
    There’s no need to use a CAST here at all. In PostgreSQL the result is as expected:
    select cast('1073741824' as BIGINT) +1 AS answer;
    answer
    ------------
    1073741825
    (1 row)

    You do know that PostgreSQL is FLOSS, eh?

  30. Wizard Emeritus says:

    Shouldn’t that be: ‘1073741824’

    you left out the ‘ ‘

  31. Deaf Spy wrote, “try this in MySQL / MariaDB:
    select cast(‘‭1073741824‬’ as UNSIGNED)
     
    Then come back to praise the advantages of open and free software.”

    Works for me:
    select cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED);
    +------------------------------+
    | cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED) |
    +------------------------------+
    | 1073741824 |
    +------------------------------+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    Heck, even this works. I’m impressed…
    select 13556735357*cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED);
    +------------------------------------------+
    | 13556735357*cast(1073741824 as UNSIGNED) |
    +------------------------------------------+
    | 14556433749710471168 |
    +------------------------------------------+
    1 row in set (0.00 sec)

    I guess my little pension account won’t bother it.

  32. Deaf Spy says:

    Robert, not only you don’t have a clue what modern musical industry uses. But you keep insisting that people do things that exist only in your imagination.

    In the meanwhile, for a change and back to topic of databases, try this in MySQL / MariaDB:
    select cast('‭1073741824‬' as UNSIGNED)
    Then come back to praise the advantages of open and free software.

  33. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Let’s just abandon rational thought and support Trump… I’ve documented that creators of musical instruments and professionals in the music industry today use this technology to produce better/cheaper instruments/works because it works for them yet Wizard clings to the past. Sad.”

    The sad thing is that you seem to refuse to acknowledge that I am not only even very much part of the present but even ahead of anything that you are capable of doing Robert Pogson. And I did not have to cobble it together with old cheap junk hardware and free software to do it either! I just sit in front of my computer and compose.

    But by all means continue to indulge your fantasy that I am somehow living in the past because I prefer to compose for the instruments that I hear in my head using commercial offerings instead of your beloved FOSS.

    All this changes nothing. You have not been able to answer my challenge to provide me with a FOSS offering that is the equivalent in quality to VSL.

    Quite while you have some shred of dignity left.

  34. Wizard wrote, “being familiar with the grounding theory or acoustics, doesn’t even begin to give you expertise on creating music”.

    Let’s just abandon rational thought and support Trump… I’ve documented that creators of musical instruments and professionals in the music industry today use this technology to produce better/cheaper instruments/works because it works for them yet Wizard clings to the past. Sad.

  35. Deaf Spy wrote, “We speak of sampling as the best way to reproduce real acoustic instruments.
     
    Synthesizing new sounds is a completely different thing.”

    Nope. You can synthesize instead of sampling too. Sound is sound. It’s produced by vibrations in air/bone/tissue. A synthesizer can produce any vibrations we want. Sampling is one way to determine what vibrations you want but modelling is also valid. I did modelling of electric fields back in the day. ISTR my grid was 128*128*32. I used integers to get more precision per word. Today, one would use a 4-D triangular mesh and as many gigabytes as you wanted to express the shape in space and time with arbitrary precision. The model could be made much more precisely than any electrodynamic speaker or transducer or musical instrument or musician.

  36. Deaf Spy says:

    Robert,

    We speak of sampling as the best way to reproduce real acoustic instruments.

    Synthesizing new sounds is a completely different thing. I think it was Jean Michel Jarre who said (by memory) “I use synthesizers to create new sounds; should I need a sound of an existing instrument, I would use the real instrument instead”.

  37. Wizard Emeritus says:

    And most important of all in this case at lease, not a single indication that these professional made use of pure FOSS offerings for the creation of their scores.

    Robert Pogson, being familiar with the grounding theory or acoustics, doesn’t even begin to give you expertise on creating music. I suggest you quit opining on subjects that you have no knowledge of.

  38. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Yes, and synthesized music is not used in various artistic mega-projects… [SARCASM, lots of it…]”

    Let see… we have

    The direct recording of real 1980’s pre MIDI analogue synthesizers.
    The use of modern ADSR synthesizers and sound processing techniques to create unique and very non-real sounds.
    And I would not be surprised of some of the processing relied on the technique samples loaded into sample playback software that you so disparaged.

    And most interesting of all the composers of both scores both call for and use real orchestras as the backbone for realizing their scores.

    Real people … Imagine that (real SARCASM)

    And again, this has nothing to do with my challenge, which you lost.

    And I will bet very good money that most if his software was commercial licensed.

    Of course, we are not talking about

  39. Wizard Emeritus says:

    Yes I have
    studied Fourier Analysis/Synthesis, though quite a few years ago, as part of learning to make music using Speech Synthesis by Analysis using Linear Predictive Coding. In fact this is one of the papers that I tackled:

    http://www.wakayama-u.ac.jp/~kawahara/atalLPC.pdf

    And I was finally able to create a 5 minute composition using digitized voices processed via this technique.

    What of it?

    Your techno snobbery has nothing to do with my challenge, which you failed at. Nor do the papers on acoustics that you cite have anything to do with the actual making of music now. Today the technique used to build musical instruments is based on sampling of real instruments, the samples of which are then loaded into computer memory into wave table lookup and then “Played back” by generalized digital players, mixed down by in memory digital mixers and played into a digital hall simulation, all in real time.

    Some of this has been done “for free” and is even available as FOSS. The results unfortunately for your point of view have been “best efforts”, and limited by the volunteer nature of the community. And for a musician/composer looking to be able to compose his/her music with what sounds like the instruments of a real classical orchestra, the best solutions remain those products created by commercial who have made the investments needed to provide the best product possible for those able to meet their terms. And if the number of people who license their products is any indication, their investments have been well rewarded.

    Fortunately for myself and anyone else who is not hung up on using FOSS only, the costs for licensing these libraries are quite reasonable in comparison for the results they give. So we have a choice.

    Which is more than you would give us if able, Robert Pogson.

  40. Deaf Spy wrote, “it generally gets no where, as results fail to impress the real world”.

    Yes, and synthesized music is not used in various artistic mega-projects… [SARCASM, lots of it…]

  41. Deaf Spy says:

    Mozart never analyzed or sampled sounds.

    Of course he didn’t, Robert! He simply used musicians or played himself.

    He made the sound

    No, Robert, he didn’t. Mozart composed sounds into music.

    As for the rest, your theorize drawing conclusions from research for a very different purpose. Btw, such research is not new. And it generally gets no where, as results fail to impress the real world. So far.

    Seems music to you is what writeln() is for Fifi.

  42. Wizard Emeritus wrote, “The algorithms that have been developed never even came close to imitating the sounds of “real” classical instruments.”

    Have you ever studied Fourier analysis/synthesis? It’s the reason sampling works at all. All vibrations can be described by a Fourier series. With modern technology more complex sounds and vibrating systems can be modelled with arbitrary precision.

  43. Deaf Spy wrote, “first you need to record the sound properly in order to analyze it to be able to reproduce it.”

    Mozart never analyzed or sampled sounds. He made the sound and accepted or rejected or modified what he got. A physicist or engineer can measure the properties of substances and physical objects and by finite element analysis tell you how the thing will behave when plucked, bumped or blown. They can thus simulate any musical instrument or create new ones with desirable properties. These days they can do that with greater precision than ever. e.g. They can simulate actors, their actions and the scenery even after an actor dies. Music is just another set of coordinates in space and time.

    Here’s an example of the application to guitars using the classical engineering tools brought up to date with modern computing.

    Here’s another example for brass instruments.

  44. Deaf Spy says:

    Any sound can be represented as a Fourier series plus transient. A super-computer can model any object by finite element analysis including its thermal properties, stresses and vibrations, everything needed to determine the sound it will make when disturbed by a musician

    Well, first you need to record the sound properly in order to analyze it to be able to reproduce it.

    This wonderful idea of yours, Robert, reminds me of a fable, attributed to Chuang Tsu). Chuang Tsu had a student, who dedicated seven years of his life studying Universe energies and finally demonstrated his skills by walking across the river by foot. Seeing this Chuang Tsu burst in tears: “Dear boy, you spent seven years to achieve what the old boatman will do for five copper coins!”

  45. Deaf Spy says:

    Relationship with Small business and SQL server is normally 1 to 1.

    Not necessarily. But what can we expect from someone who doesn’t understand how writeln() works?

  46. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “So its not imitating the sounds of a real classical instrument. The issue is working out how to emulate the imperfect human player sampling is a nice simple fast short cut.”

    Nope. the issue is the FOSS offerings that “offer” what Vienna Symphonic Library offers are piss poor in comparison. Robert Pogson was challenged to provide me with its FOSS equivalent and couldn’t

    And neither can you, sir.

    Oh and…
    “https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:Uni-Verse/Uni-Verse_Sound_Renderer”

    Has zero to do with sound sampling.. Hall simulations are a far simpler problem than instrument simulations, and there are some FOSS offerings. But hey are simply not relevant to this discussion.

  47. oiaohm says:

    André Léon Marie Nicolas Rieu know as André Rieu is allowed to play
    a particular –Stradivarius violin (1667)–

    Its not just being virtuoso 1 you have to have the skill. 2 you have to physical match the violin to be allowed to play full stop. Its kinda insane if André Rieu was 1 inch taller he would not have a single Stradivarius violin that he would be allowed to play and it would not matter how much skill he has.

    Something most people are not aware of is that bone resonance of the player on a very old violin can in fact damage it in unrepairable ways.

    With very old violins you put them in a stand and play and tap(intentionally it particular places) them in a stand then take note of the freqs produces and match them to a player. The back of the violin can in fact snap because you give it to the wrong player with the wrong bone resonance so causing the back of violin to resonate until it snaps. This is not the only place resonance can rip a violin apart. Breaking a multi million dollar item that way will you not make you popular in a good way. How simple they are to damage explains why you don’t see old ones in usage that often.

  48. oiaohm says:

    https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:Uni-Verse/Uni-Verse_Sound_Renderer

    Unfortunately throwing hardware at the problem was not the issue. The algorithms that have been developed never even came close to imitating the sounds of “real” classical instruments.
    Wizard Emeritus not exactly true. If you had real instrument played by a robot and a very good pure data(yes this is a open source bit of software) model based off the 3d data of the instrument you could not pick them apart.

    So its not imitating the sounds of a real classical instrument. The issue is working out how to emulate the imperfect human player sampling is a nice simple fast short cut.

    Its the same issue what makes CG images look fake and CG artists do a lot of work adding imperfections. For CG you have a set of things to use to add imperfections. For musical instruments those are still kinda lacking.

    If you simulated the instrument and human player with moment errors you do get very close but you are talking a hell of a lot of processing. Just like real samples where someone listens to the samples and rejects different one the same would have to happen with this.

    Some instruments the physical build of the human player directly effects the sound. At this point the number of factors to simulate some instruments just gets insane. Its bad enough having to have a detailed 3d model of the instrument but requiring a full 3d model of the human player as well makes getting the same result hard.

    This also explains why particular sampled instruments from different providers sound so different. Now if you are composing something for a group having a broad selection if different sample sets may allow you to choose sample sets that in fact match the players you do have.

    So Robert Pogson is right that a super computer should be able to simulate it. For instrument makers getting a good simulations to test out design alterations would be great. Not exactly sure if a artist would like to be 3d scanned so they can get perfectly matched instrument.

    http://www.artistinbalance.org/adjustments/
    Having the violin on the collar bone improves sound through bone resonance.
    Stradivarius’ violins vs other makes violins you have to use the same player to compare them. Why a violin tone is not based only on the violin construction but the bone resonance of the person playing it as well as the violin construction.

    In fact a violin can sound great played by one player and horible played by another nothing to do with the skill of either player but the different in bone resonance in each player. A violin is really a truly a instrument that 1 size does not fit all.

    This also explains why you need to know how to make your own sample-sets at times you can be dealing with players who will not fit inside stock sample sets due to their physical construction.

    To simulate a most common type of violin you need a 3d model of the instrument and a full 3d model of the player without both you will not be able to produce tone that the listeners are going to hear. Now of course that becomes just simple to have person play in a studio.

    Violins is serous-ally something you can never have enough sample sets of.

  49. DrLoser wrote, “Strads are bought either as an investment or for vanity. They have not been bought for any other purpose since you were born, Robert, which if memory serves me correctly was roughly in 1890.”

    There are Strads which are kept for the use of virtuosos. It’s a selling point for performing with particular groups or in particular places and a donation by the rich and famous. See Stradivari violin, “The Antonius,” played by Eric Grossman That instrument is in a museum’s collection. Putting it on display in the hands of an expert is great for fund-raising or advertising or just PR.

  50. DrLoser wrote, “what would you gain by using a supercomputer?”

    Any sound can be represented as a Fourier series plus transient. A super-computer can model any object by finite element analysis including its thermal properties, stresses and vibrations, everything needed to determine the sound it will make when disturbed by a musician. A decade or more ago, regular PCs could do a decent job, hence synthesizers became cheap and plentiful. Now, we can have thousands of CPU-cores at work doing a better job of any size. One can cluster PCs, servers or use the cloud and get a huge amount of computing power and storage to generate any sound any orchestra can make. It’s throughput, resolution, 3-D, etc. that make what was impossible a couple of decades ago possible and what was done by the best a decade ago much better today.

  51. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser do look closer SQL Server license figures up Windows Server licenses down. How can this be possible. You would be thinking data-center versions of Windows involved. Now since all non Microsoft hosting providers are offering migration services we can be looking perfectly at a bubble.
    If it does mean something, what is that “something” other than a presumed equivalence between the products and the licenses

    https://hyperv.veeam.com/blog/virtualization-rights-windows-server-2012-r2/
    Datacentre edition of Windows means has many virtual machine instances as your hardware can stand.

    Dr Loser I am totally not presuming equivalence. A bolt requires something to bind into. 10 000 bolts and 10 000 nuts makes sense. But what has happens if you sell 10 000 bolts and no nuts. So that customer must be using threaded in material mounting or is losing them a lot. This is the same thing I am referring to here. Particular sales figures of related items suggest particular deployment configurations.

    Relationship with Small business and SQL server is normally 1 to 1. Data center customer will be multi SQL server license to 1 windows license. Data center customers have no trouble running Linux so offering SQL Server on Linux will result in Data Centers moving SQL server work loads off windows so they can sell at SQL Server usage with a better TCO for them. Now data center providers are also the ones providing Migration tools to leave SQL Server completely.

    Equivalence between bolt and nut is not right is it Drloser. Relationship between bolt and nut sales is correct. So the numbers that Microsoft is showing is telling a story that may not be a good long term story.

    http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2016.html#March_22_2016
    Oracle is in a head to head fight with Postgresql at moment in many markets. Yes Russia federation is considering dropping Oracle completely along with many other countries.

  52. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “I’ve no doubt that super-computers could make damned good music without any of this sampling stuff, just pure simulations and algorithms.”

    Unfortunately throwing hardware at the problem was not the issue. The algorithms that have been developed never even came close to imitating the sounds of “real” classical instruments. The only thing that worked for those who actually wanted to use the results was using sampling of the real thing.

    And in the end, its what the user of the final product wants, not what you “think” is possible.

  53. Dr Loser says:

    Just as an example of your cloth-eared ignorance, Robert, let me repeat Deaf Spy quoting you:

    I’ve no doubt that super-computers could make damned good music without any of this sampling stuff, just pure simulations and algorithms.

    Now, it’s fair to say that we can hereby leave the concept of original music and sonority and such by the wayside. You are cloth-eared, Robert, and you are clueless.

    And it’s fair to say that we can hereby leave the concept of value for money in music sampling by the wayside, Robert. You are cloth-eared, Robert, and you are clueless.

    Nevertheless, you are a self-acknowledged expert when it comes to supercomputers. I fondly remember your terrifically convincing explanation of how you know more than I do (I, as somebody who has worked on a global search engine for three years) when it comes to the answers you get out of Google.

    I’m sure you’re equally as convincing when it comes to supercomputer sampling algorithms as applied to music sampling.

    In the words of Cuba Gooding, Jr: Show us the notes, big boy!

    (Specifically, what would you gain by using a supercomputer? And how?)

  54. Dr Loser says:

    I imagine, Robert, you are now going to come back with the retort that “It’s all just binary bits, isn’t it?”

    I advise you not to. Examine my previous two posts, and try to guess what my obvious response will be.

  55. Dr Loser says:

    It’s funny how you can’t find orchestral instruments for free, isn’t it, Robert?

    Indeed, counter-intuitive.

    People who make music, people who build instruments, people who record music, people who engineer music, people who stage music, people who distribute music, people who devote their career to music, people who compose music, even people who write about music should all follow the FLOSS model.

    What a glorious world it will be, when the only sort of orchestra available for my pleasure will be the Birmingham Unpaid Incompetent Wastrels On Dumpster-Dived Instruments In A Homeless Shelter With Tin Can Acoustics.

    Hey! I’d pay for that!

  56. Dr Loser says:

    That’s subjective, like those who claim Stradivarius’ violins are superior. Double-blind test show violinists cannot tell the difference between a genuine Strad and some new violins developed using modern technology.

    Absolutely true, Robert. But nobody mentioned a Strad, did they? Whoops, only a tin-eared maniac from Manitoba did.

    Still, let’s indulge you in this pathetic fantasy … and no, I’m not going to indulge you by claiming that the sounds made by a Strad are worth, say, $45 million. Because they aren’t*. Strads are bought either as an investment or for vanity. They have not been bought for any other purpose since you were born, Robert, which if memory serves me correctly was roughly in 1890.

    Since, however, we are on the topic of value for money, in re orchestral music samples, shall we attempt to compare the value to the purchaser?

    Here we go then.

    1) I have here this extremely expensive Strad at a knock-down price because, well, you don’t want to know why because. Let’s just say it’s a steal, shall we? (Literally.) Yours for $100,000, guv. Sonority rating: 9.9/10.
    2) I have here this considerably cheaper standard orchestral instrument at a mere £5,300. Sonority rating: 9.9/10
    3) Or we could just pick a violin used by a virtuoso 12 year old who is still practising. Sounds reasonable. Let’s say the 12 year old is up to a full-sized violin. Here it is, at a mere £500 or so. Sonority rating: Varies, but around 7/10.
    4) Or, being Robert Pogson, we could try to find a violin for free at the local dump. Or, more realistically, at a charity shop. Sonority rating: “Ow, I cut me bowing hand on a narsty bit of sharp tin in the dump, the bow is worthless, the strings are snapped, the keys are loose, and somebody’s pet badger ate half the bottom out of the sound box!”

    I’ll give you a very generous FLOSS out of 10 on that last one, Robert.

    You are so totally clueless when it comes to musical instruments that I wonder why you even bother to post on the subject.

    * Strads are indeed worth whatever somebody will pay for them. But that measurement of worth is entirely orthogonal to their measurement of worth in terms of the resultant sound.

    As even a cloth-eared provincial ignoramus such as yourself should have instantly spotted, Robert.

  57. Wizard Emeritus wrote, “there have been tries to recreate musical instruments via algorithms for over 30 years, and while they created some pretty interesting sounds, none of them came close to what can be created by sound sampling and a good sound sample player.”

    That’s subjective, like those who claim Stradivarius’ violins are superior. Double-blind test show violinists cannot tell the difference between a genuine Strad and some new violins developed using modern technology.

    Any musical instrument is a physical system that can be modeled with any degree of precision these days, just as Boeing and others design planes that actually fly and produce a targeted fuel-consumption. I was involved designing real stuff in the 1980s using tiny RAM. I know what a difference arbitrary gigabytes and CPU power means. Sampling works. I know that. Simulation/synthesis does as well and it’s much more agile technology. You still need engineers to make it happen but once they have their model built, it can produce whatever sound a creative person wants. Just as digital graphic art has made huge leaps with modern technology, so has audio art, music. You can even get a PhD in the subject… It’s gone beyond interesting and into practical. The range of application far exceeds whatever was done by simply assembling and rehearsing with an orchestra or imitating an orchestra with sampling combined with synthesis.

  58. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Bwaha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Good one, Robert. You don’t even understand the purpose of sound sampling!”

    Oh there have been tries to recreate musical instruments via algorithms for over 30 years, and while they created some pretty interesting sounds, none of them came close to what can be created by sound sampling and a good sound sample player.

    And the few FOSS projects that implement sampled sound instruments are limited and, in the context of what VSL offers not even worth working with for free.

  59. Deaf Spy says:

    I mean, it’s meaningless gibberish, but it seems to imply that one would expect a single sale of Windows Server for each single sale of SQL Server.

    That would be too much for the little poor braincells of Fifi. How can he know anything about licenses for virtual servers using Windows Server Datacenter and Standard editions?

  60. Deaf Spy says:

    I’ve no doubt that super-computers could make damned good music without any of this sampling stuff, just pure simulations and algorithms.

    Bwaha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Good one, Robert. You don’t even understand the purpose of sound sampling!

    Actually, I shouldn’t have laughed at you. I am sorry Robert. You are obviously, hm, well, musically-impaired. It is not nice to laugh at people with deficiencies.

    The more you go into explaining how much you understand, the more you reveal that you don’t have an idea.
    It’s a well-understood project that many do in their basements to save the cost of the building.
    Totally wrong, Robert. You confuse composing music from ready samples (and loops) and recording electronic instruments to recording acoustic music. Please save the little dignity you’re left with and stop here.

  61. wizard emeritus wrote, “Show me a currently available FOSS package that is its equal.”

    That’s a waste of time. You would never accept the result of such a search. You should note that the project you worship was developed ~2000 and much in electronics/computing has evolved greatly since then. Any project of any kind producing a similar product recently is likely to be superior. ie. we’ve gone from 90nm to 14nm in that period and RAM, networking, transistors and ADC devices are all superior today. Thus, anyone can produce stuff superior in accuracy, noise, and cost compared to that older technology. Now, we have superior artificial intelligence and modelling so the state of the art of a newer project could be far better yet cost less. That’s just technology, which I understand. I know those things even if I know relatively little about making music.

    We’ve reached the place where computers can beat geniuses at playing games. I’ve no doubt that super-computers could make damned good music without any of this sampling stuff, just pure simulations and algorithms.

  62. Deaf Spy wrote, “You have no idea how much work it is to create a high quality sound library, Robert. You’re a specialist in Physics, right? Shame. You should have known better about sound, sound recording and sound playback.”

    Nonsense. I used to design and build the equipment we used in nuclear physics. I understand costs ranging from material, design, fabrication and use. Some of our stuff took years to design and build and was only used for a few months. It was one-off stuff. Sound labs tend to use off-the-shelf stuff, which is much easier to acquire and costs way less.

    e.g. We were building a machine/device that was basically a bunch of aluminium blocks hollowed out and fitted with various windows, connectors and electrodes. We could have just ordered cast aluminium in huge chunks and turned loose on it with bandsaws, lathes/mills/drills but that would have been too easy and had the possibility of stress-relief distorting the result, so the boss ordered space-age stuff stress-relieved in advance at a multiple of the cost. Same with copper used to make certain electrodes. He demanded ultrapure oxygen-free copper so it might have less a tendency to spark in high vacuum. So, we left nothing to chance and built one of the best devices of its kind, stuff that could not be bought off-the-shelf. Many of our parts were custom-made because we needed more precision than was commercially available. Our hearts stopped when one got lost on a courier’s plane. It ended up travelling the world before it finally arrived. Replacement cost was ~$40000, and remanufacturing could have delayed the project months. So, I know about costly projects and a sound-stage is easily done with a bit of cash, a few tradesmen and technicians. It’s not one-off. It’s a well-understood project that many do in their basements to save the cost of the building.

  63. Dr Loser says:

    Oh, and this nitwit thing that Fifi has about SQL Server and Windows Server? I may well have been confused by the following idiocy:

    Dr Loser do look closer SQL Server license figures up Windows Server licenses down. How can this be possible. You would be thinking data-center versions of Windows involved. Now since all non Microsoft hosting providers are offering migration services we can be looking perfectly at a bubble.

    Actually, I’m still confused by it. Does it mean anything?

    If it does mean something, what is that “something” other than a presumed equivalence between the products and the licenses?

    I mean, it’s meaningless gibberish, but it seems to imply that one would expect a single sale of Windows Server for each single sale of SQL Server.

  64. Dr Loser says:

    It’s tiny in comparison to just about anything Google does.

    Which has BOG ALL to do with ANYTHING, Robert.

    Google has invested literally billions of dollars in infrastructure, R&D, and — whisper it not — marketing and lawyers and such. Google requires a return on that investment. Google gets that return via (for the most part) on-line advertising.

    You, Robert, in your own mind, do not pay for that on-line advertising. But somebody does.

    Commercial sound libraries have invested somewhat less, but still probably millions of dollars, along the same lines. Commercial sound libraries require a return on that investment. Commercial sound libraries get that return by selling their packages.

    You, Robert, do not pay for those commercial packages.

    Isn’t it a little immoral to gulp down the joys of other people paying for your services via advertising, whilst moaning bitterly that more normal people than yourself are actually prepared to spend money on their digital needs?

    And isn’t it rather cretinous to claim that Company B (music libraries) should abstain from making money out of their activites, whereas Company A (Google) should just keep on coining it?

    The mind boggles.

  65. Dr Loser says:

    It’s not rocket-science.

    No, it isn’t, Robert. But it is sheer raw talent at the top of the spectrum of talent in the field backed up by the standard 10,000 hours of practise.

    OK then, let’s forget musicianship. Apparently you have no truck with that. And let’s forget professional sound engineers.

    Is there anybody, anybody at all, who you think should be paid and paid well because they are simply very good at their job?

    And why pick on musicians, anyhow? Are you tone-deaf? Did a viola player* drop you on your head when you were young?

    * Traditional viola player joke: “Oh, I’m sorry. I was just applying resin to the kid’s head.”

  66. DeafSpy says:

    It’s tiny in comparison to just about anything Google does. It is pocket-change

    Dream on, Robert. Dream on that someone will pay and then be charitable enough to give it to you for free. Dream on.

    Too pity one can’t insert ads into a sound library. No business model for Google. 🙂

    a few guys in a quiet room with a bit of equipment… Even my meagre financial resources could probably do the same if I wanted. It’s not rocket-science. The world can and does make its own software and sounds.

    Not only you demean the labor of musicians and sound engineers. You, Robert, lie. Show me “sounds of its own” to prove your point. But be careful, we speak of a high quality sound library, not something that any professional will turn down in disgust.
    Until then, Robert, you lie.

    I’ve worked on far larger projects (University of Manitoba Cyclotron Laboratory, King Faisal Specialist Hospital Radiopharmaceuticals, and many schools all with multi-$million per annum budgets).

    Perhaps you have. Perhaps you haven’t. You have no idea how much work it is to create a high quality sound library, Robert. You’re a specialist in Physics, right? Shame. You should have known better about sound, sound recording and sound playback.

  67. wizard emeritus says:

    I can pretty much guarantee Robert Pogson, that you could not duplicate the efforts that the Vienna Symphonic Library ( A German Company BTW.) puts into creating their sound libraries. DeapSpy has done a good job of describing what would be needed and since you have ignored what he wrote, I see no reason to repeat it.

    I do however repeat my challenge to you: Show me a currently available FOSS package that is its equal.

    I’m waiting for your admission that you can’t.

  68. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “Narrow minded someone could always take Vienna Symphonic Library over and release it FOSS.”

    And if my Aunt had testicles she would be my uncle…

    “And this is a wrong statement many of the free samples sets to run properly require using open source play back software. So you could be rejecting better sound sets due to your stupid point of view against FOSS parts.”

    Who are you to say what is a wrong statement sir! Your opinion does not determine right and wrong. If I say that I have found most of what can be gotten for free in the area of samples to be either irreverent to my music making or inferior to what I havd before I acquired VSL, that is all that counts. Not your ignorant statements.

  69. Deaf Spy wrote, “Does your little mind even start to grasp the effort behind making a high-quality sound library?”

    Yes, I do. It’s tiny in comparison to just about anything Google does. It is pocket-change, a few guys in a quiet room with a bit of equipment. I’ve worked on far larger projects (University of Manitoba Cyclotron Laboratory, King Faisal Specialist Hospital Radiopharmaceuticals, and many schools all with multi-$million per annum budgets). Even my meagre financial resources could probably do the same if I wanted. It’s not rocket-science. The world can and does make its own software and sounds. No one has a monopoly on such things.

  70. Deaf Spy says:

    Well, suppose Google wished to use the digitized sounds for mail notifications or such and bought the company with its pocket-change.

    Of course, Google should pay for it so that you can use it for $0. Chuckle. I wonder how do you keep believing in this fantasies when even Android is not fully open sourced.

    With FLOSS everything is possible.

    Good mantra. It is charming how you hide behind it when it comes to areas which you know absolutely nothing about. Like databases and sound engineering.

    With the price of hardware these days, anything is possible.

    Totally irrelevant to the issue of creating a high-quality sound library. The costs of top-notch hardware are in the range of statistical error, compared to the personnel costs required.

    Admit it, Robert. You simply don’t know what you are talking about here, do you?

  71. Deaf Spy wrote, “Does your little mind even start to grasp the effort behind making a high-quality sound library?”

    Well, suppose Google wished to use the digitized sounds for mail notifications or such and bought the company with its pocket-change. Google could release the hounds as part of the Android SDK, for instance. If the company refused to sell out, Google could create its own division for sounds next week and carry on with scarcely a ripple in the world. Heck, a FLOSS project might sign up a few thousand musicians who are into FLOSS and create a fresh library next month. With FLOSS everything is possible. With the price of hardware these days, anything is possible. You may notice that the dinosaurs are just about gone even though they were once invincible…

  72. Deaf Spy says:

    Narrow minded someone could always take Vienna Symphonic Library over and release it FOSS.

    Bwaha-ha-ha-ha!

    Fifi, you try to best yourself over writeln(), dear. This is a good try, indeed!

    Does your little mind even start to grasp the effort behind making a high-quality sound library? This, little one, involves takes several things:
    1. A set of quality instruments.
    2. A set of very, very good players, who can produce clean sounds from every one of these instruments.
    3. A very-well equipped audio studio room, with perfect sound isolation and echo-damping.
    4. Extensive knowledge in recording instruments. It usually takes more than one audio-engineer, as brass instruments and horns are particularly nasty to record properly.

    Fifi, you are a lying little fraud. Apologize for writeln(), or shut the beep up.

  73. Deaf Spy says:

    The fact that they are giving away their core stuff is telling.

    Robert, which is this “core stuff” they are “giving away”?

  74. oiaohm wrote, “DrLoser is a complete idiot who like making up that I claimed stuff when I never did.”

    Some people look at things through rose-coloured glasses. Others shut their eyes. DrLoser looks through dirty windows… There was a time when M$ and its products were the goto items of IT. Yes, there’s still a large installed base but it’s not growing very much at all. Moving stuff from client to cloud just obscures the numbers but they have moved from a realm where they had eliminated all competition to where they have multiple competitors in every product line and margins are plunging. The fact that they are giving away their core stuff is telling. They are getting close to adopting a FLOSS-like model of selling services related to the software rather than copies of the software. It’s all good. M$ understands that the cash-cow is drying up even if DrLoser does not.

  75. oiaohm says:

    Wizard Emeritus
    The Vienna Symphonic Library is one of the top Sample libraries in the world. It is highly doubtful that it is going to go anywhere any time soon. And even if it did, I would be more likely to purchase a different commercial sample library than I would to fall back on the inferior offerings that have been created under the FOSS, even if they are free.
    Narrow minded someone could always take Vienna Symphonic Library over and release it FOSS.

    Also in the database world its coming clear that inferior offerings are starting to become the closed source ones.

    Wizard Emeritus as time moves on if FOSS is inferior or not changes.

    I don’t have to deal with FOSS at all, no do I have to invest one iota of my time in it.
    And this is a wrong statement many of the free samples sets to run properly require using open source play back software. So you could be rejecting better sound sets due to your stupid point of view against FOSS parts.

  76. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser cannot read
    Dr Loser do look closer SQL Server license figures up Windows Server licenses down. How can this be possible. You would be thinking data-center versions of Windows involved. Now since all non Microsoft hosting providers are offering migration services we can be looking perfectly at a bubble.
    I never said they were the same product. But related products. Reactions between related products shows deeper going on.

    And only a moron implicitly repeats the claim that SQL Server and Windows Server are one and the same product. They are not.
    DrLoser is a complete idiot who like making up that I claimed stuff when I never did.

  77. luvr says:

    oiaohm said, “Dr Loser I see you love doing sexual harassment. Girlie and Princess.”

    Well, we all now by now how obsessed DrLoser is with red leather miniskirts, don’t we? His obsession affects his abilities to think straight, and all he can come up with is (attempted) insults, bad language, and whatnot. I wouldn’t pay too much attention to the lost cause that he is (though your mileage may, obviously, vary).

    In fact, I remember how he once complained about how Robert put up sexually oriented ads on this site. He evidently didn’t even realise that the ads get selected based upon the interests of the user of the site… So much for his credibility.

  78. Dr Loser says:

    Really that is not exactly correct. SQL Server requires a hosting OS.

    I draw your attention to Robert’s parallel thread on the precise subject of an alternative hosting OS.

    Only a moron says hey they are complete different products they are not required.

    And only a moron implicitly repeats the claim that SQL Server and Windows Server are one and the same product. They are not.

    You do like doubling down on failure and ignorance, don’t you, Fifi?

  79. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “wizard emeritus I see olderman back under a new handle again. Explains why a lot.”

    Yep. I retired and adopted a new handle. No big Deal.

    “Since you are not likely where the topic is going you decide to bring in this subsect point of view.”

    The comment stream that you stuck your two cents into is related directly to the following comment from Robert Pogson that I took umbrage with:

    “The users can and should contribute resources to make the product better, faster and more useful.

    Of course I was waiting for Robert to respond, but since you have chosen to exercise your dubious poseur credentials, I will now respond to you…

    “What in heck would you do if Vienna Symphonic disappeared. FOSS is future proofing. ”

    The Vienna Symphonic Library is one of the top Sample libraries in the world. It is highly doubtful that it is going to go anywhere any time soon. And even if it did, I would be more likely to purchase a different commercial sample library than I would to fall back on the inferior offerings that have been created under the FOSS, even if they are free.

    “Reality you cannot change things without breaking a few things. Anyone expecting it to be perfect for everyone is a joke. ”

    So I am supposed to fumble around with FOSS offerings which doesn’t do what I want it to instead of plunking down my cash for software that does exactly what I want it to do? That is the most remarkably stupid thing I have ever heard.

    ” To in fact be able to make music with the most sample access you should be using a percentage of FOSS like it or not wizard emeritus. Now question becomes are you going to invest in improving the FOSS parts you should be using anyhow?????”

    I have already got 3 different libraries from three different vendors, all of which work with my software, none of which was all that expensive, and all of which meet my needs NOW, without any extra effort. If I should feel the need to compose with non orchestral sounds, there are more than enough sample libraries both commercial and free available that work with my software on windows. I don’t have to deal with FOSS at all, no do I have to invest one iota of my time in it… I am too busy using that time to compose anyway.

    ” find it great that a lot of music people complain hey FOSS does not offer this then audit their systems find they are using FOSS parts then not putting any investment into their future back. FOSS development is linked to groups investing in it.”

    And I find your attitude idiotic. If a commercial vendor happens to use some component of FOSS as a foundation of the product that they sold me, they will no doubt as part of their efforts to keep their customer happy. I personally need do nothing – I plunked down my cash and I am busy making music.

  80. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser I see you love doing sexual harassment. Girlie and Princess.

    Dr Loser answer this question what sex am I documented as. That is right Male. You have even stated my suspected name a few times. Sexual harassment to people even outside the companies you are working for is grounds to be fired. I have to presume due to this action Dr Loser is not employable.

  81. oiaohm says:

    wizard emeritus I see olderman back under a new handle again. Explains why a lot.

    I Just took delivery on another set of licenses for software related to my music making. from a Company named Vienna Symphonic Library (http://vsl.co.at/en). i will leave it for you to peruse the software if you dare and listen to the demos. Care to find me its equvalent Robert Pogson?
    Since you are not likely where the topic is going you decide to bring in this subsect point of view.

    And don’t lecture me about the joy of making my own.
    Reality here is its not about the joy of making your own. What in heck would you do if Vienna Symphonic disappeared. FOSS is future proofing.

    wizard emeritus music is not in the same place as databases where there is a central groups being charged for databases for volumes of users who can cost save by going FOSS.

    https://www.freesound.org/ Also just because you don’t want to make your own does not mean others don’t want to.

    And that in the end is what it is about, performing that task that I want or need to get done using specific software running on te computer that is set up to run the software in question.
    This means you were a person who when Windows 95 was release breaking dos applications you were one of those complaining to get dos applications back that were never fixed.

    Reality you cannot change things without breaking a few things. Anyone expecting it to be perfect for everyone is a joke. Windows is down right slow at building code and running databases compare to OS X or Linux.

    Not dicking around with source code trying to fill in the gaps or fix bugs in that grea free FOSS software that you go on about.
    Sorry wizard emeritus if you don’t have the source code and they break something you have to try to work around the bugs with no means of fixing them. So going No FOSS has just as many downsides. Only idiot attempts using a line like that as a difference.

    Vienna Symphonic Library makers recommend using Linuxsampler that is FOSS to use third party sound libraries. To in fact be able to make music with the most sample access you should be using a percentage of FOSS like it or not wizard emeritus. Now question becomes are you going to invest in improving the FOSS parts you should be using anyhow?????

    I find it great that a lot of music people complain hey FOSS does not offer this then audit their systems find they are using FOSS parts then not putting any investment into their future back. FOSS development is linked to groups investing in it.

  82. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser

    SQL Server is a completely different product to Windows Server.
    Really that is not exactly correct. SQL Server requires a hosting OS.

    Only a moron says hey they are complete different products they are not required.

    A car company selling cars has to buy so many tires right. Cars are tires are different products right you idiot Dr Loser.

    Dr Loser really when you grow a few IQ points get back to me.

  83. Dr Loser says:

    Dr Loser do look closer SQL Server license figures up Windows Server licenses down. How can this be possible.

    Ooh, I don’t know, Princess. How about addressing the reality?

    SQL Server is a completely different product to Windows Server.

    Try harder next time, girlie. And why not use a question mark when you are asking a question?

    Baby steps, Princess, baby steps. Next up, I’ll be asking you to use a reputable spell-checker — say, LibreOffice or even the miserable effort provided by WordPress on this very site — to check your verbal diarrhoeia for obvious mistakes.

    One step at a time, little girlie. One step at a time.

  84. Dr Loser says:

    Migrating to cloud has many negative effects for closed source database solutions.

    Gibberish.

    Followed by the traditional Wall’O’Gibberish.

    Try harder next time, girlie.

  85. wizard emeritus says:

    “Lets See…”

    Ican cherry pick too Robert Pogson. Google and Amazon have large staff of engneers and developers. They have turned FOSS to their own benefit, and salve the community by throwing back crumbs in the form of patches that allow them to continue to use their freebies. As for the other businesses, they represent only a narrow slice of companies who can afford the people overhead to use FOSS. For the rest, there is no free lunch using FOSS.

    I Just took delivery on another set of licenses for software related to my music making. from a Company named Vienna Symphonic Library (http://vsl.co.at/en). i will leave it for you to peruse the software if you dare and listen to the demos. Care to find me its equvalent Robert Pogson?

    And don’t lecture me about the joy of making my own. Its an enormous amount of work that you dont even have a clue about. I know because many years ago I ported to x86 on DOS the CMUSIC system for making what was then called “computer music” I have been there and done that. Now if Ican afford it I plunk down my cash and get on with being a musician and composer.

    And that in the end is what it is about, performing that task that I want or need to get done using specific software running on te computer that is set up to run the software in question.

    Not dicking around with source code trying to fill in the gaps or fix bugs in that grea free FOSS software that you go on about.

    Save your baloney for someone else.

  86. Wizard Emeritus says:

    ” Against any complications in doing that one must way the cost of extrication from non-Free software and dealing with the ever-increasing expense and complexity of licences like M$’s and Oracle’s.”

    The only complication that I can see for Robert Pogson is that Robert Pogson would actually have to stick a crowbar into his wallet and actually pay for software. Zero$zero$ is in the end the subtext of all of your spiel on FOSS.

    It doesn’t work that way for everyone. Some of us understand that in the end, you get what you pay for, and that some things cost.

  87. Wizard Emeritus wrote, “Business users have work to do. it is far simpler to pay for a product that is either ready to go with features that they need out of the box, features that they can simply use/program to without either re-inventing the wheel or paying someone else to do so.”

    Let’s see.

    • Last I heard, Google was a business. They mess around with FLOSS a lot.
    • Last I heard, Amazon and FaceBook were business. They mess around with FLOSS a lot.
    • CERN’s not a business but they find messing with FLOSS hugely advantageous.
    • Genentech is a business which messes with PostgreSQL and a bunch of other FLOSS. It works for them.
    • The Washington Post and many others are businesses who find PostgreSQL works for them.

    So, stating, “it is far simpler to pay for a product” doesn’t seem to be work for businesses, especially if there is no product available at any price that does what people need done. If people have to write software to create complicated websites and web-applications, it’s just a matter of degree dabbling with the code of the database. Against any complications in doing that one must way the cost of extrication from non-Free software and dealing with the ever-increasing expense and complexity of licences like M$’s and Oracle’s. I remember when M$’s EULA fit on a single screen… I remember when one could pay for a copy of software and use it anywhere anyway. Now one pays an arm and a leg and needs permission to use the remaining arms and legs… It’s just not worthwhile compared to the Freedom of FLOSS.

  88. Wizard Emeritus says:

    “The users can and should contribute resources to make the product better, faster and more useful. ”
    Clueless as usual, eh Robert Pogson? . Business users have work to do. it is far simpler to pay for a product that is either ready to go with features that they need out of the box, features that they can simply use/program to without either re-inventing the wheel or paying someone else to do so. Business users realize that there is a cost of doing business and sometimes you need to invest money in order to make a job easier to do. You unfortunately have more than proven that you do not understand this at all.

    Of your nonsense about what a computer user “can and should do” , I will say this:
    I have better things to do with my time than attempt to save some money by helping band-aid together to half assed piece of FOSS when I can plunk down a reasonable amount of cash for a commercial product. And should I under some circumstances choose to contribute my skills to improve some piece of software it will not be for free – my time is actually worth something monetarily, unlike yours.

  89. oiaohm wrote, “The parties mostly funding FOSS projects are the intermediaries.”

    That’s one of the beauties of FLOSS. The users can and should contribute resources to make the product better, faster and more useful. That works for everyone even the non-contributors. It makes the world a better place where everyone can have really good IT for a modest price. Hardware is moving towards a similar modus operandi with ARM and projects as small as Raspberry Pi. Everyone, anywhere, can send an e-mail and tell the “upstream” people what they need. That’s why gigabit ethernet, n-wifi, more RAM, faster CPUs are getting into small cheap computers that real people can afford to do real IT that works for them. I like it. It’s working. You can see a wide variety of diverse projects based on PostgreSQL. Even non-techies can help create logos and such. Contributors of code include a long list of people and organizations and then there are so many who take the result and run with it.

  90. oiaohm says:

    Migrating to cloud has many negative effects for closed source database solutions.

    Major hosting companies since they are hosting more databases the cost of having a professional staff to migrate customer solutions to cheaper cost wise databases is less.
    Compare to a company hosting database themselves hosting companies staff have way more experience at doing the migrations as well.

    Presuming that hosting companies just do what the customer requests is not true. Prime reason why companies are moving to cloud is to cost save. If hosting company offers to cost save more exactly why will the company not jump at this.

    Remember 100 million dollar company putting something in amazon aws will not be in a location where they have to attempt to-do a database migration allown and without experience how to pull it off successfully.

    Basically intermediaries DrLoser wants to ignore are coming the driving force for what database companies will use in future. The migration to cloud is not doing Microsoft any flavors unless it the hosting provider Microsoft owns. Because hosting providers are reducing the cost and staff required for companies change from closed source database to Foss or Foss relegated.

    The parties mostly funding FOSS projects are the intermediaries.

    Just like Microsoft on their hosting provider has to provide Linux as a option. In time Microsoft will most likely will have to offer FOSS databases as back end option to remain competitive.

  91. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser Oracle had a bubble about 4 years ago. Same thing started then where hosting providers were starting to offer migration support to Postgresql.

    SQL Server releasing on Linux may be the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made. Its simpler to-do database to database replication when they are running on exactly the same OS. So at this stage SQL Server windows only encourages hosting houses to keep more copies of Windows around.

  92. oiaohm says:

    Dr Loser
    Major hosting companies are intermediaries, Fifi. Middle-men.

    Intermediaries sell what their customers desire. Amazon, for example, is selling the opportunity to cut data-centre and admin costs by moving your, Initrode Enterprises Inc, database to Teh Cloudz.
    Really you like being a complete moron. How can Major hosting companies make more coin. Provide customers with options not to use solutions they have to pay for. Profit for intermediaries to convincing customer to pay the same money for a item that costs them less to acquire.

    But if you’re expecting a $100 million annual revenue company to move both the location of their data to the Cloud and at the same time migrate from one RDBMS to another …
    Now you just stated the problem. Amazon solution does not require doing both at exactly the same time. Amazon allows SQL Server and Oracle usage in cloud while providing the tools to migrate to more cost effective solutions for Amazon.

    Reality you did not read the Amazon statement completely or the link I provided either.

    Dr Loser do look closer SQL Server license figures up Windows Server licenses down. How can this be possible. You would be thinking data-center versions of Windows involved. Now since all non Microsoft hosting providers are offering migration services we can be looking perfectly at a bubble.

  93. Dr Loser says:

    Major hosting companies don’t want to pay Database companies at all.

    Major hosting companies are intermediaries, Fifi. Middle-men.

    Intermediaries sell what their customers desire. Amazon, for example, is selling the opportunity to cut data-centre and admin costs by moving your, Initrode Enterprises Inc, database to Teh Cloudz.

    Now, you clearly have never worked for anything above a 50-person SME, because this in itself is a challenge for larger enterprises. Sure, there are cost advantages. This is your selling-point, as Amazon. But managers of larger SMEs, and beyond, don’t really like relinquishing control. They like to have all those lovely useless admins below them in an Org Chart that’s five or six or seven deep reporting to them.

    On balance, commercial imperatives will probably win in 80% or more of cases. The DB will move to Teh Cloudz. (Beware! Might be Azure!)

    But if you’re expecting a $100 million annual revenue company to move both the location of their data to the Cloud and at the same time migrate from one RDBMS to another …

    … In general, you are nuts.

    I don’t say it won’t happen on occasion. But given corporate politics, it’s an extremely unlikely eventuality.

    One risk at a time.

  94. Dr Loser says:

    I sometimes wonder whether you bother to read any of your cites at all, Robert.

    I don’t expect Fifi to do so, because he is a trollop and a self-admitted liar.

    But you, Robert — you are a professional.

  95. Dr Loser says:

    Then again, since you brought the topic of Form 10-Q, December 31st 2015, up, Robert, I don’t see why we shouldn’t examine it as evidence for your claims on databases.

    Let’s do so neutrally, insofar as one can analyse a 10-Q neutrally. (I know, I know, we can’t. But we can try.) Let’s just search for “SQL.” And what do we find?

    Intelligent Cloud revenue increased $302 million or 5%, mainly due to higher server products and cloud services revenue, as well as higher Enterprise Services revenue. Intelligent Cloud revenue included an unfavorable foreign currency impact of approximately 6%. Our server products and cloud services revenue grew $153 million or 3%, driven by revenue growth from Microsoft Azure of 127% and higher revenue from Microsoft SQL Server, offset in part by lower revenue from Windows Server. Server products and services revenue included an unfavorable foreign currency impact of approximately 7%. Enterprise Services revenue grew $123 million or 10%, mainly due to growth in Premier Support Services.

    We shall stipulate that your analysis of 2015 as a down year (compared to 2014) is correct in an actuarial sense, Robert.

    Given that stipulation — you’re flat-out proven wrong on the database side, aren’t you?

    It increased revenue. It did not decrease revenue.

  96. Dr Loser says:

    M$ has many products so their decline is not just about databases …

    And yet you cite their financial report specifically to support your theory about their decline in database dominance, Robert.

    Consistency is not one of your stronger suits, is it?

  97. Dr Loser says:

    PS: Oh, M$? They are down 10% in revenue and down 13% in earnings per share… Sad, eh? [SARCASM]

    Sad for whom, Robert? It’s endlessly fascinating to me that you appear to spend quite a lot of your time poring over M$ accounts — which you cannot remotely understand, because you are not an accountant — whereas I, an ex-M$ employee, frankly couldn’t give a toss about them.

    What’s sad is that you lost, through sheer bigoted blindness, the opportunity to pump your retirement pot up by 20% last year. And naturally, being the wiz you are at stock timing, and what with your detailed perusal of the December 2015 accounts and the forward prospects, you’d be even better off, because you’d be able to short the company and double up on the gains!

    But you’re not going to do that, are you, Robert? Because in your heart of hearts you recognise that it’s a mug’s game to bet against the MSFT stock price in the short or medium term.

    It doesn’t stop you telling everybody else to do that, every three months or so, does it?

    C’mon, Robert. At least put a little of your money where your mouth is. Short $1,000 of MSFT over the next six month period.

    I mean, $54? That’s outrageously high! Don’t these people read your blog?

  98. DrLoser wrote, “Are you seriously proposing those cites of yours as evidence of a huge step change in the enterprise environment?”

    Yes. In the world of tech, when revenues and share-prices decline, real changes are happening. M$ has many products so their decline is not just about databases but they’ve certainly lost whatever lock they had. I remember a time when folks would ask M$ for a database just because they ran TOOS on the server. Those days are long gone. What Oracle is doing with licensing is driving the rats out of a sinking ship. Oracle can maintain the stream of revenue as long as those still aboard can pay but that could be ended for most in a short time. That’s a major shift.

  99. Dr Loser says:

    I’d say it’s beyond vaporization and has reached conflagration.

    An interesting, and yet somehow very concrete, scientific metaphor to use, Robert.

    I forget. Did you earn your degree by slowly parboiling frogs, or by learning Physics?

    Either way, it’s a metaphor without feet. What could it possibly mean? Are you seriously proposing those cites of yours as evidence of a huge step change in the enterprise environment?

    I do so hope that you are. I’ve run out of fools to throw thruppence at, down the local loony bin.

  100. oiaohm wrote, “This is the problem the old game of database vendor locking is starting to vaporise.”

    I’d say it’s beyond vaporization and has reached conflagration. For Oracle, every revenue stream of a dozen kinds except cloudy stuff is down. The net revenue for the total is down. Share-price from last year is way down… The markets are speaking. QED

    PS: Oh, M$? They are down 10% in revenue and down 13% in earnings per share… Sad, eh? [SARCASM]

  101. oiaohm says:

    Amazon Aurora yes is a Mysql fork so it syntax is Mysql. Amazon maintains it own replication module.

    AWS Schema Conversion Tool allows migrating between Amazon Aurora, Mysql, Postgresql and MariaDB always. Issue here SQL Server and Oracle DB are basically import only into that set of 4 even that the software could be provide the option to go the other way.

    On Azure, you have also SQL Server.
    But customers don’t want to pay for that DeafSpy.

    http://www.symmetricds.org/about/overview
    Like it or not database migration tools have come a very long way.
    they can maintain continuous replication between databases
    Is basically a block of open source code.

    This is the problem the old game of database vendor locking is starting to vaporise.

    Major hosting companies don’t want to pay Database companies at all. If you want to have choice of hosting company you are fairly much being pushed into FOSS based or FOSS related database solutions.

    So biggest threat to SQL Server and Oracle is PostgreSQL, and MariaDB.

  102. dougman says:

    I suspect Oracle won’t be around in 15-years.

    “…sales of new software licenses for products that run on-premises fell 11% year over year. That on-premises category makes up 70% of Oracle’s overall revenue, so there’s reason for concern there.”

    http://fortune.com/2016/03/15/oracle-database-earnings/

  103. DrLoser says:

    While that may be true, don’t you think that Amazon would provide other options if customers wanted them?

    Read the article. They do. The exact numbers are not apparent, however.

    Now read the article again. The main thrust is that Amazon is offering a suite of tools to migrate your Corporate DBs to the cloud. Some of these (like this putative PL/SQL translation tool, which I’m a little dubious about until I see it in action) are for migration between different DB platforms. Most are not.

    Now read the article yet again. Doesn’t it sound a teeny bit like a placed Marketroid puff-job for Amazon’s own Aurora? It sure does to me.

    Aurora is Amazon’s me-too clone of MySQL. As Robert says, Amazon is in it to make money, not to support FLOSS.

    As far as I’m aware, though, Aurora is the in-house Amazon database, so at least you’re getting the benefits of R&D on this particular FLOSS solution. Assuming that MySQL has all the features you desire, of course. If you need the features of PostgreSQL — you’re SOOL on this one.

  104. luvr says:

    DeafSpy said, “The demand is not for a PostgreSQL db. The demand is for a cloud-hosted relational database. On Amazon, this is what you have.”

    While that may be true, don’t you think that Amazon would provide other options if customers wanted them?

  105. DeafSpy says:

    You are getting it wrong, Robert. The demand is not for a PostgreSQL db. The demand is for a cloud-hosted relational database. On Amazon, this is what you have. On Azure, you have also SQL Server.

    Cloud business is where Oracle are now falling behind, Larry Elison admitted that recently. Let’s see if that will translate into actions. I am afraid Oracle may turn into another IBM.

Leave a Reply