From: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hackers List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: SET variables |
Date: | 2001-05-13 16:45:20 |
Message-ID: | 3AFEBA20.D8755FC6@mohawksoft.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Don Baccus wrote:
> The interesting thing to me doesn't simply lie in the debate over this or that feature.
> The interesting thing to me is that more and more requests to ease porting from Oracle
> to Postgres are cropping up.
>
> This says that more and more people from the "real" RDBMS world are starting to take
> Postgres seriously.
Speaking for myself, I think Larry has enough money. The costs of Oracle are
astounding. As I see it, I think Postgres could be the "single server" answer
to the sky high per processor licensing that Oracle has.
A Postgres with enough Oracle-isms would be a world beater. As it is, when I
show Oracle people what Postgres can do, they are blown away. They love the
fact that temporary tables are in an isolated name space, sequences are more
flexible, and a lot of the other neat features.
If we could do:
select * from database.table.field where database.table.field =
localtable.field;
select * from table where field = :var;
and not have to vacuum
Postgres would be incredible. As it is, it is a great database. If it could
have features which make Oracle people comfortable it would be a very serious
alternative to Oracle. Companies like Greatbridge and PostgreSQL inc. would
have a much easier sell.
--
42 was the answer, 49 was too soon.
------------------------
http://www.mohawksoft.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Don Baccus | 2001-05-13 17:28:08 | Re: SET variables |
Previous Message | mlw | 2001-05-13 16:31:33 | Re: SET variables |