Open Source Weblog

[UPDATE - Andy has himself responded to the O'Reilly posts, see below.]

“Our product is not open source, but we are based on open source,” he replied, describing the fact that the company’s Advanced Server is based on the PostgreSQL open source database and adds functionality such as performance, enterprise tools, and compatibility with Oracle databases.

According to Astor, “well over 80% to 90%” of the Advanced Server code is PostgreSQL, while the company has also recently started offering support packages for the open source database.

However, he also made clear that this will not contribute a significant amount to the company’s revenue stream. “Our driving business is EnterpriseDB, and will continue to be 80% to 90% of the business,” he said. “We did not go into business to be a PostgreSQL support organization."

So, EnterpriseDB: open source vendor or not? Clearly it’s not a black and white decision, and there are degrees of openness. Is Novell and open source vendor? Partially. Is Sun? When it comes to software, yes. Is Oracle? A little bit. Is Microsoft? A tiny bit, but clearly, not really.

For my part, having had the model fully explained to me by Astor, I took the decision to stop referring to EnterpriseDB as an “open source database vendor” in news stories and articles, as can be seen from our recent article on VC funding:

“The level of interest in open source is evident in the experience of EnterpriseDB, which offers an enterprise database of the same name built on the open source PostgreSQL code base… While EnterpriseDB's key database enhancements, such as Oracle compatibility, and reliability improvements, are not open source, Astor believes that the firm's involvement in the open source community was a key factor in raising the funding.”

However, I continue to include the company in CBR’s list of open source funding deals because clearly an investment in EnterpriseDB is an investment in the strengths of the open source development model.

At the end of the day, it really depends why you are asking. Does EnterpriseDB rely on open source? Yes. Does it support open source development? Yes. Does it contribute back to the community? Yes. Does it make most of its money from proprietary extensions? Yes.

Does this matter? When it comes to deciding whether the company should be an OSCON speaker; that’s for O’Reilly to decide.

For most business users whether EnterpriseDB is “an open source company” or not is irrelevant, but what is significant is that the company offers a compelling alternative to Oracle at a good price.

The fact that it is able to do this is because it is based on open source code. And the fact that it is able to base its product on open source code is due to the license.

As O’Reilly’s Randal points out:

“It seems a bit hypocritical to extol the greater freedom offered by the BSD license (as its supporters do), and then look askance at companies who use the rights granted to them.”

Randal also raises the potential that EnterpriseDB may eventually release some of its own code under open source licenses. I also asked Astor about that potential – his answer was a non-committal ‘maybe’.

“We’re all trying to figure out the business models that work, and they’re evolving,” he added.

In this regard, it’s important to note the difference between a business model and the open source development model.

Clearly the two are very different, and as MySQL CEO Marten Mickos noted last year there are at least 13 different open source business models.

According to Marten, EnterpriseDB falls in to the following category:

7. Software is free but we built a closed-source product around it (EnterpriseDB, GreenPlum)