From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment |
Date: | 2020-06-14 01:27:25 |
Message-ID: | 20200614012725.GA12122@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 05:06:37PM -0500, Ron wrote:
> On 6/13/20 1:46 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 08:53:45PM +0200, Andreas Joseph Krogh wrote:
> > > I agree these are all technical issues, but nevertheless - "implementation
> > > details", which DBAs don't care about. What's important from a DBA's
> > > perspective is not whether WAL is cluster-wide or database-wide, but whether
> > > it's possible to manage backups/PITR/restores of individual databases in a more
> > > convenient matter, which other RDBMS-vendors seem to provide.
> > > I love PG, have been using it professionally since 6.5, and our company depends
> > > on it, but there are things other RDBMS-vendors do better...
> > The bigger issue is that while we _could_ do this, it would add more
> > problems and complexity, and ultimately, I think would make the
> > software less usable overall and would be a net-negative. We know of no
> > way to do it without a ton of negatives.
>
> How do other RDBMSs do it with ease? (I know it's an architectural issue,
> but what's the architectural issue?)
I don't know.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com
The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-14 02:15:56 | Re: Fwd: not able to give usage access to public schema |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2020-06-13 22:53:46 | Re: postgres issue |