Re: Oracle2PostgreSQL Migration with PL/pgSQL

DA Morgan wrote:
> Guido Stepken wrote:

<snip>
> Apparently copying the design of the Oracle counts as doing something not
> done by "traditional" database systems. Nothing like marketing folks to lack
> in integrity. If Oracle isn't a "traditional" database system ... I'd like
> to know what is.

Hey, not fair! Don't put us in the same box as *Oracle's* marketing department.

As you quoted, it says "superior to most commercial database systems".

                                     ^^^^

The "most" word is kind of important to the sentence here. :)

Both PostgreSQL and Oracle use MVCC. Don't think other commercial systems have moved to an MVCC based approach yet (if ever). From memory, other Open Source databases (FireBird) also use an MVCC based approach now too.

> The day PostgreSQL and Oracle killer? I'd check the label on the
> medication. ;-)

As always, it's best to correctly choose the product to suit the need. There are places where PostgreSQL is faster and/or scales better on a single server, and there are instead places where PITR is needed thus PostgreSQL isn't yet an option.

> Not that it is a bad product. But anytime they get in Larry or Bill's way
> ... they'll do to them what was done to Fox and Informix.

Sure. The Oracle marketing teams will use their um... high-integrity tactics... to encourage people to move to Oracle from the alternatives.

Not sure how Oracle's marketing teams are going to work against a product based on a no-profit-needed-in-order-to-thrive business model though. Pretty sure we're going to find out though in the next few years.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

> Daniel Morgan

-- 
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi