Re: Big disappointment with Postgres
From: gazzag <gareth_at_jamms.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 06:43:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <cff80954-8c5e-4920-87e6-9222a27839e2_at_u6g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 4, 1:40 pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I invested quite some time in learning the thing, as it seemed very
> similar to Oracle. Unfortunately, when it came down to the pilot project,
> the mass of the SQL to be ported ultimately required optimizer hints.
> There was simply a mass of SQL, ported to different architecture which
> needed quick & dirty fix, because of the sheer volume and the deadline.
> Unfortunately, Postgres community is run by programming wiz kids who have
> never managed a large database and they sanctimoniously refuse to even
> consider hints.
> Consequently, I have to kill the pilot project. Postgres is, simply, not
> a viable alternative. Not with that attitude, anyway.
>
> --http://mgogala.byethost5.com
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 06:43:03 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <cff80954-8c5e-4920-87e6-9222a27839e2_at_u6g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>
On Feb 4, 1:40 pm, Mladen Gogala <gogala.mla..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I invested quite some time in learning the thing, as it seemed very
> similar to Oracle. Unfortunately, when it came down to the pilot project,
> the mass of the SQL to be ported ultimately required optimizer hints.
> There was simply a mass of SQL, ported to different architecture which
> needed quick & dirty fix, because of the sheer volume and the deadline.
> Unfortunately, Postgres community is run by programming wiz kids who have
> never managed a large database and they sanctimoniously refuse to even
> consider hints.
> Consequently, I have to kill the pilot project. Postgres is, simply, not
> a viable alternative. Not with that attitude, anyway.
>
> --http://mgogala.byethost5.com
Good plug for Oracle support :D
Seriously though, is this a fair comparison?
-g Received on Fri Feb 04 2011 - 08:43:03 CST