| From: | Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Chris Travers <chris(dot)travers(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Rodrigo E(dot) De León Plicet" <rdeleonp(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hope for a new PostgreSQL era? |
| Date: | 2011-12-09 03:11:12 |
| Message-ID: | 4EE17C50.9070707@ringerc.id.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 12/08/2011 08:27 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Craig Ringer<ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au> wrote:
>
>> Areas in which Pg seems significantly less capable include:
> Please can you explain the features Oracle has in these area, I'm not
> clear. Thanks.
>
Marc has, as I was hoping, done so much better than I could. Most of
what I know is 2nd hand from Oracle users - I'm not one myself.
It's interesting to see the view that the resource manager for query and
user prioritisation is hard to use in practice. That's not something I'd
heard before, but I can't say I'm entirely surprised given how
complicated problems around lock management and priority inversion are
to get right even in a system where there *aren't* free-form dynamic
user-defined queries running.
--
Craig Ringer
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-12-09 03:13:06 | Re: |
| Previous Message | Rodger Donaldson | 2011-12-09 02:47:21 | Re: Hope for a new PostgreSQL era? |