Free supported Java turns up in latest SQL Server 2019 preview

Microsoft will be including free support for Java with SQL Server 2019 in a move that involves a little shade thrown at arch-rival Oracle. Java in SQL Server is nothing new – the language can be found lurking in various places around the product, including the interop layers used by the company's data virtualization tech. …

[elDog]

"something that will keep Larry's yachts afloat awhile longer" - great line

I sort of expect Larry to join John McAfee trolling the beaches of low regulatory countries fairly soon. Birds and feathers.

[JulieM]

Paying Oracle

If you don't want to pay Oracle for your Java, wbich is fair enough, why not use MariaDB or Postgres and not pay for your SQL either?

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: Paying Oracle

Exactly

Why move from one lot of Vendor lock in (and ever upward licensing/support costs) to another equally nasty/dirty/shyster vendor when you can give both of them the 'virtual' finger eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Paying Oracle

"why not use MariaDB or Postgres and not pay for your SQL either?"

MariaDB fairly sucks compared to SQL Server in terms of manageability, performance, and functionality (lack of windowing functions for one). Postgres is good, though.

[Aitor 1]

Re: Paying Oracle

I use sqlite for tiny databases, MariaDB for small to medium datasets, Postgres for large and MongoDB for huge ones

I am quite sure that this is quite common, and some use cases may call for different solutions.. for example if on the cloud you might prefer object storage APIs, and program APIs, not databases.. and, anyway, are you not using spring boot or equivalent to abstract that?

[pan2008]

Re: Paying Oracle

You will store your dataabse in mongodb? with billions of rows, 1000s tables? Good luck with that. SQL Server and Oracle have the best performance. The other are catching up.

[JulieM]

Re: Paying Oracle

If you approach a typical tie-wearing spivvy salesman working for a typical corporation and tell him you have a requirement for something to crack a nut with, he's going to try to sell you a steamroller -- preferrably the most expensive one in the catalogue, because he gets paid more commission for selling you a more expensive product.

Given that you use 20% of the features 80% of the time, I'd bet a fair number of people paying for proprietary databases would be no worse off with something else. And if you're using Java alongside a database, then the chances are that most of the actual SQL is hidden away behind methods specific to your objects, which in turn are calling a generic database driver; so replacing the database server and thus the SQL dialect should be reasonably painless.

The spiv is always going to try to convince you that you can't live without special feature X that's conveniently present only in the more expensive products, even when your use case doesn't really require it. If you use a feature only rarely, it can be emulated in the application or driver layers; and the slowdown will be less noticeable because it is only happening occasionally, if not masked altogether by a serendipitous speedup elsewhere.

It's about not walking all the way to the tool shed to fetch a chisel, if there is a screwdriver to hand which is up to the job (note the emphasis; you're heading for grief, if it isn't).

[teknopaul]

Re: Paying Oracle

Its the other way around. People do want to pay for Java support. Just not to Oracle.

[SVV]

Oracle wants you to pay for your Java support

So, is SQL Server support now free then?

[pan2008]

Re: Oracle wants you to pay for your Java support

Yes, millions of SQL server related posts (literally) and get responses from a SQL MVP within a day normally. Never had to pay for sql server support.