The database industry is getting way too action packed for my blood.
First we had Sun buying MySQL, then Oracle buying Sun (thus inheriting MySQL and Java)
(recall they already owned
InnoDb (the MySQL main transactional engine) and they also by the way own BerkelyDB
which is the database engine underlying Subversion repository
and they also own all those CRMS and ERPs (Peoplesoft and Seibel),
and now we have IBM integrating EnterpriseDb into their DB so that it can look like Oracle Db.
What next? Perhaps Microsoft will join the party
to integrate EnterpriseDb into their SQL Server offering so SQL Server can look like Oracle and better yet a SQL Server for Linux/Unix to complete the circle.
Now why would such a thing be good for Microsoft to think of:
Microsoft can't compete with Oracle on the Linux/Unix front and many companies are diversifying on their OS
SQL Server is not the only portion of their selling - but helps sell their other offerings -- CRM/Development Stack/etc.
SQLServer, since the 2005 version, can run functionally equivalent to Oracle. M$ added SNAPSHOT isolation, which is functionally the same (although some will argue about it) as MVCC, the concurrency mechanism used by Oracle/Postresql.
The IBM/Postgresql relationship is clearly defensive by IBM. Rather than adding SNAPSHOT or declarative MVCC to 9.x, they did a quick and dirty IMS port, calling it pureXML. M$ did the smart thing.
IBM is gambling that their mainframe DB2 will win. It won't. Mainframe DB2 is a thin veneer over VSAM, and is good only as a sql parser between COBOL and VSAM files. It is rarely used by COBOL programmers to do anything relational. I know, I had to deal with such folks for some years.
The Intel chip (and may be AMD tagging along), with *nix and multi-core/processor boards will blow the mainframe away. Only legacy dinosaur companies (does Financial Services industry sound familiar) will go down that road. In time, they will be made obsolete by true innovators. IBM/DB2 is in deep doodoo.