| From: | Jean-Michel POURE <jm(at)poure(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Mapping Oracle types to PostgreSQL types |
| Date: | 2003-10-17 14:52:20 |
| Message-ID: | 200310171652.20583.jm@poure.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Le Vendredi 17 Octobre 2003 16:32, Matthew T. O'Connor a écrit :
> This would be wonderful. However, I believe the guys at Compiere tried
> to do this already and gave up on porting it to postgresql due too a
> couple of PostgreSQL limitations. I don't remember what they are
> exactly, I think it had to do with nested transactions, maybe
> savepoints, not sure exactly. You should be able to find some mention
> of this on their site. It sounded to me like they use a lot of Oracle
> features.
There are only a few limitations in PostgreSQL like nested transaction,
updatable cursors and Oracle PL error handling. Can we call these
"limitations"? Most of us can live without them. These "limitations" are only
a small portion of the code (sometimes a few lines like updatable cursors).
Cheers, Jean-Michel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrian Maier | 2003-10-17 15:26:55 | Romanian Press Release |
| Previous Message | Kris Jurka | 2003-10-17 14:43:09 | Re: Mapping Oracle types to PostgreSQL types |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2003-10-17 14:53:35 | Re: Some thoughts about i/o priorities and throttling vacuum |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-17 14:50:16 | Re: Some thoughts about i/o priorities and throttling vacuum |