It says that Oracle Corp. sent a special Postgres-related letter to at least several big Russian IT companies. In the letter Oracle is suggesting the ways to protect Oracle DBMS from migration to Postgres in government organizations and big Russian companies where many years Oracle was the default DBMS choice.
Now, in 2016, such migration in many cases is very probable (and some companies already did it or started to do), since government itself wants to depend less on specific foreign vendors and considers Postgres as good OSS DBMS alternative supported by local developers.
The first page of that letter: https://gist.github.com/NikolayS/1bbc624dfc088be6f15c – so it really looks like Oracle Corp. claims that Postgres is worse than Oracle in literally everything: performance, reliability, security, manageability, scalability, etc. Even (sic!) the Total Cost of Ownership is among the properties they are referring to.
I think that this doc proves that Oracle knows pretty well were their Oracle partners/distributors interests lie (simply saying "bigger the price – better revenue for both") and sending it Oracle tries to help distributors to protect their mutual $-related interest showing how to behave. The thing is that doc in many its claims is wrong. But in many cases in will work and final customer will receive solution that was chosen not on his best interest ("quality/cost") but rather on the interest of Oracle and its distributors.
I've got that doc now – see the PDF attached (again in Russian, please use Google Translate).
It's poorly written in terms of Russian grammar, and contains factual mistakes (e.g. the claim about lack of XML/JSON in Postgres), but nevertheless is official comparison from Oracle and underlines many Oracle's strong features.
Is it worth to react somehow on this?
If yes – anyone interested in creation of similar document which will prove that Postgres in many cases *is* a good substitution? I'd translate it and publish in Russian, and spread among journalists.