"Guido Stepken" <stepken_at_little-idiot.de> wrote in message
news:b4mu0p$7sh$00$1_at_news.t-online.com...
> Under this aspect it is possible to bring postgresql back into everyones
> eyes when to choose a industrial strength database. PostgreSQL can
> replace oracle in about 95% (my personal estmation) of all
> installations. Sure oracle has features, all other databases don't have.
> Its not the question "which is the better one", but "which database is
> sufficient for my needs".
It may be because I'm just used to the feature, but one example that has
already come up is PITR. I have a hard time believing that 95% of the
businesses that run Oracle would be able to accept moving from a position
where a system failure results only in loss of data from that point until
the point at which the error is discovered, to a place where they had to go
back to the last good backup tape. This would especially apply where users
of the system were external to the owneres of the system, but then perhap;s
postgreSQL isn't targetting web systems.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
Received on Wed Mar 12 2003 - 08:14:40 CST
