Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Enters The Database Market
tekBuddha writes: "It looks like Red Hat is trying to make its way into the database market. This article on Yahoo! says Red Hat is about to announce its own product ingeniously named 'Red Hat Database' next Monday. "
The same thing happened with the product called "SuSE Email Server." It turned out to just be Postfix, Cyrus, and some other things pre-integrated and shipped in a nice-looking box bundled with a support agreement. Considering the magnitude of writing a database, I'd expect Red Hat's offering to be something similar. They didn't survive the Linux company shakeout and turn a profit by being stupid.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
I don't understand this at all.
OK, so, you can't use Oracle, because its proprietary. Fine, use MySQL. No, wait, that's largely banked by VA (IIRC). Also rule out Postgres, and Interbase for similar reasons.
So *develop your own*? That just makes no sense. "NIH" (Not Invented Here) kills companys, it blinds their thinking from the best tool for the job.
Why can't Red Hat just partner with NuSphere/Greatbridge/etc? Is it NIH, or something about business I just don't understand?
Last point: This has (apparently) appeared out of nowhere. Some press, but that's it. No beta program. No white papers. No conspicuous hiring of RDBMS gurus - hell, check the Borders in Durham, I doubt they've even bought a textbook on databases. What gives here? Are they going to launch a product without first having running code?
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
That would be a fantastic move... as far as I know there are no other players in the databse-market, so Red Hat should be able reak in heaps of profit!
I would also look into the databae-market, which is also unexploited.
:-)
Also note that Greatbridge does NOT SELL PostgreSQL - it sells services. I would bet money that it is PostgreSQL that RedHat produces, and contracts out tech support to Greatbridge.
Synergies exist, there is no direct competition, and the owner is an old friend.
I think the writing is on the wall.
-Mark
oracle already runs on linux. i've run 8.1.5, 8.1.6 and 8.1.7 on redhat 6.2 without any problems. i have a development 8.1.6 server that has been up and getting hammered for almost a year now without a reboot or a restart or oracle.
What would the impact be, compared to the fact that Oracle would soon be running on Linux and also Informix (acquired by IBM) and DB2 would soon be running on Linux clusters ?
Do you think Redhat could have some clout in convincing the market that it can build a solid database compared to the solutions already out there. Agreed, that Linux is a solid server OS, but that itself wouldnt do. RedHat needs to have a solid solution which doesnt depend on Linux, but be able to stand on its own, in terms of TPS and Performance issues.
Rapid Nirvana
Actually, I think most databases perform ok while their admins are on acid.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
Of course, why anyone would pay for something as simple as "rpm -i postgres-..." is beyond me.