That Yandex chiefly targets the Russian, other Cyrillic, and Turkish markets limits its exposure to people who aren't in those markets. And some of it has to do with the kitchen-sink nature of what Yandex does (a lot of tech and some media), in that it's easy to mistake them to be similar to other such companies (Yahoo, Verizon, AOL -- incidentally they're now all the same) that have a similar spread of services, and yet they're not generally complimented in their tech achievements.
[1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/everything_but_the_kitchen_si...
[2] http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/everyt...
Yeah ok but you could say the same thing about google and they're doing well. You have yandex mail, web analytics, ads etc. How is that different from what google is going? In fact, I would say that yandex is trying to google's roadmap on how to conquer the world and see if they can pull it off in russia with the advantage that they currently have there.
- There are a lot of Googlers on HN, not so many Yandex-ers
- Google, in the general public's minds, is buoyed by positive mindshare that was generated a very, very long time ago (early-to-mid-2000s). Today's Google has appreciably changed from those days, and yet their likeability has mostly been unaffected.
- Google tried to make their lack of focus official by spinning off a corporate umbrella parent by the name 'Alphabet', like Philip Morris Companies the "tobacco" company renamed itself to 'Altria' in 2003 because at the time it owned 84% of Kraft Foods Inc., a large food and beverage company [1].
I maintain that to an American, Yandex is most analogous to Yahoo or AOL rather than Google, because Google is, as of writing, a company that makes money primarily from ads and is under transition to pursue higher revenue streams from business-to-business sources (like Google Cloud Services) more so than by brokering advertising. Whereas Yahoo or AOL are tech-media hybrids. I know Yahoo and AOL don't evoke such positive brand power anymore than, say, Google, but their structure I believe is more reflective of Yandex.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_Foods_Inc#Philip_Morris_...
Like for Google, the main revenue stream for Yandex is also ads – they have >50% in market share in Russia, context ads network and RTB. With good Partner Network accepting websites. From recent products, Yandex.Taxi is a huge success, also taking leadership on Russian market, beating Uber and Gett. So with strong leadership in search, ads and young taxi markets in Russia it doesn't even close to Yahoo in comparison, it's definitely "Russian Google".
There are a couple of downsides, but really - there's a lot more upsides to Postgres than downsides (IMO).
So the biggest in my experience is not enterprise support. Folks generally expect it to be. The biggest is actually flexibility. Oracle DB is good at handling some edge-case scenarios, such as a RAC cluster with a failover cluster running an Advanced Dataguard Reporting instance in a whole different state.
Basically you are running a (super expensive) near real-time cluster that's doing compressed log-shipping to another cluster, and you have a standby on that secondary cluster that's open in a read-only mode. And none of it requires cron jobs or excessively complicated setup.
However... even though I've done stuff like this for a number of clients, there are SO MANY better ways to address these sorts of scenarios with creativity and elbow-grease that Postgres tends to be a better tool.
The caveat, of course, is when the person who sets it up leaves, and some other person has to take over. With Oracle's scenario, it's mostly just a slightly unusual config of a standard set of tools. The more creative Postgres solution might be quite a bit more of a learning curve.
This is just an example off the top of my head, but it is one that came up recently. A client had a shipping/receiving system that could not go down, so the 20k+ per node was trivial. To reduce the load for reporting, they just simply had us open a standby DB for read-only reporting on the failover cluster - and they liked that so much, we set up another one for them local to the offshore reporting team.
It's absolutely possible to do something like that with Postgres clustering, but there's a whole lot fewer folks doing it.
So #1 benefit of Postgres for Oracle shops is transition cost. It's cheaper than Oracle (by sometimes substantial amounts), and relatively painless to switch to. A lot of code can move unmodified, all the same platforms, and often even the same teams of folks in the same jobs. Postgres scales very well, at the very least it can handle 90% of a given company's Oracle load with no real issue. Things like clustering, backups, failovers, and reporting systems can be re-engineered to work in similar ways on Postgres, though some will require substantial hackery.
The #2 benefit is stability. Oracle has a very bad track record (especially lately) when it comes to patching and supporting older databases. If you just want a DB to sit in the corner and work for a year, with push-button easy security patches at most... Oracle isn't really the product anymore. Oracle CPU (critical patches) are cumulative now, and the bloat is getting out of hand. I recently just installed a set of patches that were almost an extra 5GB for the footprint... minor for a 20TB database, but ridiculous if you're thinking of thousands of small distributed hosts.
For example - on a QA system we were running a couple of custom one-off patches delivered by Oracle Support. These blew up the entire patch process. I had to stop, back them out, re-patch, then re-apply the one-off patches.
Oh, and 12c is a seriously whiny bitch about XDB. Just for added fun.
A useful series of tweets by @SwiftOnSecurity about why storing data in the US isn't a bad idea:
https://twitter.com/SwiftOnSecurity/status/77549120598337126...
At the end of the day, the people who have the guns and the authority to use them against you take a more prominent place in one's threat model than a foreign entity with no jurisdiction.
I think you've been so thoroughly brain-washed by russian-hating american media that you can't even think straight any more. I realise that this isn't really an argument, but I already presented my argument (that with the usa gov you have facts, whereas the russian gov you have suspicions) and it didn't seem to make a difference, so i don't really care to continue this conversation.
It ought to be obvious to anyone that applying black and white judgements in these situations is idiotic. Do I think the US government is beyond reproach? No. Do I think the US government is more open and accountable than the Russian government? Yes.
> (that with the usa gov you have facts, whereas the russian gov you have suspicions)
Yes, because the US government is open and accountable enough that this information is public. The same cannot be said for the Russian government.
Yes. In fact, I'd say that's the case even if your only concern is with the US government.
Virtually all of the controversy over US government actions with regard to local data is about violation of expectations (some of which are codified into law) about domestic surveillance by doing things which are uncontroversial in the context of foreign surveillance, and its not like the US lacks capacity or will for foreign surveillance.
That said, Russia doesn't even have the constraints (legal or mere expectations) on domestic surveillance that the US domestic actions raise concern for violating, so if your concern extends beyond US government surveillance, then that compounds the problem when hosting in Russia.
(Everything just works and there are no insane bribes to pay to various mafias.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/12/business/global/12ikea.htm...
The direct bribes is really for low-level clerks like police officers or fire hazard inspector s.
Let's say someone claims that their programmer genius Ivan saved a company ~1m USD/year with latest commit; and awards him $100k. And you see this unusual bonus, how are you going to know 99% of that doesn't go to someone other than Ivan?
Edit: there are many ways to hide bribes, of course. Typically it involves overpaying for something. It would be hard for even a non-corrupt tax authority to tell the difference between having bad negotiation skills and bribes.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-04-25/how-putin...
I was possibly confused by this article just before posting that comment:
http://calvertjournal.com/news/show/3035/founder-of-yandex-r...
(It's hit #4 in Google for his name.)
It's Pavel Durov. https://twitter.com/durov