Re: New Oracle system in our house, migration chances

On 13/1/22 6:04 μ.μ., Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
> On 13/1/22 5:02 μ.μ., Alicja Kucharczyk wrote:
>> czw., 13 sty 2022 o 15:54 Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com <mailto:achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>> napisał(a):
>>
>> On 13/1/22 4:51 μ.μ., Thomas Kellerer wrote:
>> > Julien Rouhaud schrieb am 13.01.2022 um 15:13:
>> >> I would go with option A if possible.  If you want to get an idea of how
>> >> complicated a migration would be, ora2pg does have a migration cost assessment
>> >> report [1].  It can even check the queries if you have the audit trail enabled
>> >> on your oracle database (if that existed in that version).
>> >>
>> > I second this. Option A) is much cleaner. In my experience compatibility layers
>> > that promise that "System A" behaves exactly like "System B" also introduce
>> > a lot of additional problems. And if something goes wrong, you can never be sure
>> > which part causes the problem.
>> Thanks, of course I agree with the last sentence.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Achilleas Mantzios
>> DBA, Analyst, IT Lead
>> IT DEPT
>> Dynacom Tankers Mgmt
>>
>>
>>
>> just to be clear is it an ISV or in-house built system? Because I see two different answers ...
>
> in-house, and when not in house source is available, can you pls show me where I wrote a conflicting answer?
to be more clear, they forked the initially ISV 20 years ago, so now there is effectively only in-house.
>
> --
> Achilleas Mantzios
> DBA, Analyst, IT Lead
> IT DEPT
> Dynacom Tankers Mgmt

--
Achilleas Mantzios
DBA, Analyst, IT Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt