Re: Why mention to Oracle ?

From: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>
To: Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why mention to Oracle ?
Date: 2024-09-20 14:56:48
Message-ID: 484a27f9-dea5-4734-93d5-90fb757080bc@vondra.me
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 9/20/24 14:36, Marcos Pegoraro wrote:
> Why PostgreSQL DOCs needs to show or compare the Oracle way of doing
> things ?
>
> I understand that on page Porting from Oracle PL/SQL is ok to mention
> Oracle, but there are other places where it's not needed. Or, if it's ok
> to mention, why not mention SQL Server or MySQL or any other ?
>

It's not quite clear to me whether your suggestion is to not mention any
other databases ever, or to always mention every existing one. ;-)

I didn't dig into all the places you mention, but I'd bet those places
reference Oracle simply because it was the most common DB people either
migrated from or needed to support in their application next to PG, and
thus were running into problems. The similarity of the interfaces and
SQL dialects also likely played a role. It's less likely to run into
subtle behavior differences e.g. SQL Server when you have to rewrite
T-SQL stuff from scratch anyway.

regards

--
Tomas Vondra

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2024-09-20 14:59:41 Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2024-09-20 14:42:37 Re: Adding skip scan (including MDAM style range skip scan) to nbtree