4 ms·

24 hour/365 production support is a requirement for large companies, sell that. Putting features behind a paywall doesn't work when the entire business can be f

24 hour/365 production support is a requirement for large companies, sell that. Putting features behind a paywall doesn't work when the entire business can be forked and those features implemented for free. See AWS with Elasticsearch. There's a reason enterprises use MSSQL, Oracle, etc.

FearlessNebula 6y ago
If I understand this correctly, you're saying companies choose to license paid databases like Microsoft SQL or Oracle over open source SQL databases for support. What kind of support do companies need for a database? I can't figure out this error message my query generates or how can I update to the next version of your DB? Something along those lines?
- hvasilev 6y ago
  if there is a sufficiently large issue with the product itself, the vendor is monetarily incentivised to fix it asap. I personally have no expectation of that for free / os software.
  - silvestrov 6y ago
    > sufficiently large issue My experience is that for 99% companies there is absolutely no way to be "sufficiently large" for Oracle to take notice of any bugs/problems with their SQL database. As you don't have the source, there is no way to get the problem fixed. With open source software you can go on the market and hire one of the developers or an independent contractor.
    - ab_testing 6y ago
      I think it depends on the type of Oracle product that you are implementing. Having implemented Oracle packaged products for a long time (ERP, OBIEE etc.), there are hundreds of known bugs in each of the modules. In fact, many times, new clients comb through the bug reports before implementing a new module to check if a listed feature has a bug.
  - blihp 6y ago
    Not with Enterprise software they aren't. The vendor contracts (as it's typically written on the vendors paper rather than the customers) have more than enough wiggle room to get out of virtually any scenario. It's only with smaller software companies where you may be able to negotiate these sorts of terms.
- SteveNuts 6y ago
  Honestly, it's more about CYA than anything. A sev 1 issue pretty much automatically means a ticket to all relevant vendors at large companies, and typically you'll have a dedicated SE and TAM that will join your war room. You don't want to be the guy whose idea it was to roll some DB you compiled from source off of github and now some critical functionality isn't working and it's on you to fix it. Even medium size businesses will pay quite a bit of money for support, just in case. Source: I've worked at a fortune 10 in IT. There, it wasn't uncommon to have your SEs from 2-3 different software/hardware vendors on the bridge while troubleshooting any production issues.
- marcosdumay 6y ago
  If you have a problem with an Oracle database you can have a support person on your place in a very short time, willing to share all the kinds of knowledge that Postgres developers publish on their site from the start (and nothing more, but they will answer your specific technical questions, what is good because with Oracle, you will have a lot of them). I still don't know what is the fuzz with SQL Server support. AFAIK, no Microsoft support will ever help you in any way.
  - SteveNuts 6y ago
    But you see, it doesn't matter if they don't actually help you. The bosses want to hear that you talked to the vendor, and it gives them an out and someone else to finger point at when issues happen. The fact that SV hasn't really caught onto this is part of the reason there's not a huge penetration of startup tech into huge companies.
    - rmah 6y ago
      Oracle and many other old-school enterprise software companies ARE Silicon Valley. SV caught onto this decades ago.
      - SteveNuts 6y ago
        Fair, then the new crop seems to have forgotten it
- thrashh 6y ago
  You ever have those moments where you’re just scrounged together a solution from reading a bunch of random tickets and forum posts and you’ve found this fix someone write that may work and now you’re going to try it? I don’t mind doing it but at the same I hate it because you’re in uncharted territory. Support can help you be that second person in the room that has more familiarity with the problem than anyone on your team. Also I’ve used Postgres and MSSQL and MSSQL has more features. Postgres only got non-materialized CTEs I think like 10-15 years after MSSQL had them, for example.
blihp 6y ago
It's more a combination of executive CYA and availability of resources (employees, contractors and vendors) who know the product. The actual support provided, even when you are a large customer, often leaves much to be desired. It's usually easier to get the vendor to implement obscure feature X than getting their (significant/useful/timely) help in putting out today's operational fire caused by their product.
- SteveNuts 6y ago
  Agreed, and I covered this in a few replies, I should have put it in my main comment, CYA is the entire reason. I'm not saying a business surrounding an open source project can't make money. I am saying trying to make money by locking away features is a bad way to do it. Focus on your product and do it in a single stream rather than separating it into FOSS and a paid tier. Make your money on support contracts. Smaller companies that self-support probably won't pay you for those features anyways.

FearlessNebula 6y ago

If I understand this correctly, you're saying companies choose to license paid databases like Microsoft SQL or Oracle over open source SQL databases for support. What kind of support do companies need for a database? I can't figure out this error message my query generates or how can I update to the next version of your DB? Something along those lines?

hvasilev 6y ago
if there is a sufficiently large issue with the product itself, the vendor is monetarily incentivised to fix it asap. I personally have no expectation of that for free / os software.
- silvestrov 6y ago
  > sufficiently large issue My experience is that for 99% companies there is absolutely no way to be "sufficiently large" for Oracle to take notice of any bugs/problems with their SQL database. As you don't have the source, there is no way to get the problem fixed. With open source software you can go on the market and hire one of the developers or an independent contractor.
  - ab_testing 6y ago
    I think it depends on the type of Oracle product that you are implementing. Having implemented Oracle packaged products for a long time (ERP, OBIEE etc.), there are hundreds of known bugs in each of the modules. In fact, many times, new clients comb through the bug reports before implementing a new module to check if a listed feature has a bug.
- blihp 6y ago
  Not with Enterprise software they aren't. The vendor contracts (as it's typically written on the vendors paper rather than the customers) have more than enough wiggle room to get out of virtually any scenario. It's only with smaller software companies where you may be able to negotiate these sorts of terms.
SteveNuts 6y ago
Honestly, it's more about CYA than anything. A sev 1 issue pretty much automatically means a ticket to all relevant vendors at large companies, and typically you'll have a dedicated SE and TAM that will join your war room. You don't want to be the guy whose idea it was to roll some DB you compiled from source off of github and now some critical functionality isn't working and it's on you to fix it. Even medium size businesses will pay quite a bit of money for support, just in case. Source: I've worked at a fortune 10 in IT. There, it wasn't uncommon to have your SEs from 2-3 different software/hardware vendors on the bridge while troubleshooting any production issues.
marcosdumay 6y ago
If you have a problem with an Oracle database you can have a support person on your place in a very short time, willing to share all the kinds of knowledge that Postgres developers publish on their site from the start (and nothing more, but they will answer your specific technical questions, what is good because with Oracle, you will have a lot of them). I still don't know what is the fuzz with SQL Server support. AFAIK, no Microsoft support will ever help you in any way.
- SteveNuts 6y ago
  But you see, it doesn't matter if they don't actually help you. The bosses want to hear that you talked to the vendor, and it gives them an out and someone else to finger point at when issues happen. The fact that SV hasn't really caught onto this is part of the reason there's not a huge penetration of startup tech into huge companies.
  - rmah 6y ago
    Oracle and many other old-school enterprise software companies ARE Silicon Valley. SV caught onto this decades ago.
    - SteveNuts 6y ago
      Fair, then the new crop seems to have forgotten it
thrashh 6y ago
You ever have those moments where you’re just scrounged together a solution from reading a bunch of random tickets and forum posts and you’ve found this fix someone write that may work and now you’re going to try it? I don’t mind doing it but at the same I hate it because you’re in uncharted territory. Support can help you be that second person in the room that has more familiarity with the problem than anyone on your team. Also I’ve used Postgres and MSSQL and MSSQL has more features. Postgres only got non-materialized CTEs I think like 10-15 years after MSSQL had them, for example.

blihp 6y ago

It's more a combination of executive CYA and availability of resources (employees, contractors and vendors) who know the product. The actual support provided, even when you are a large customer, often leaves much to be desired. It's usually easier to get the vendor to implement obscure feature X than getting their (significant/useful/timely) help in putting out today's operational fire caused by their product.

SteveNuts 6y ago
Agreed, and I covered this in a few replies, I should have put it in my main comment, CYA is the entire reason. I'm not saying a business surrounding an open source project can't make money. I am saying trying to make money by locking away features is a bad way to do it. Focus on your product and do it in a single stream rather than separating it into FOSS and a paid tier. Make your money on support contracts. Smaller companies that self-support probably won't pay you for those features anyways.