| From: | Marcos Pegoraro <marcos(at)f10(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why mention to Oracle ? |
| Date: | 2024-09-20 17:42:17 |
| Message-ID: | CAB-JLwYW8v2XFr9pQwZznf5v0=JiGJZyNChcBh8Z8pm3ezQYyA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em sex., 20 de set. de 2024 às 11:56, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>
escreveu:
> 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. ;-)
>
My suggestion is: Postgres DOCs are written and have to be read by Postgres
users, just that. If you are Oracle user, search for a tutorial on how to
migrate to Postgres or find tools for it, but not in DOCs
Because if you write something for Oracle users, SQL Server users can claim
why there is no "Porting from T-SQL to PL/pgSQL" ?
And MySQL users can do the same, and so on.
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.
>
Maybe Oracle was the most common DB which migrated to Postgres, but I'm
not sure this is true for today.
regards
Marcos
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2024-09-20 17:47:43 | Re: First draft of PG 17 release notes |
| Previous Message | Marcos Pegoraro | 2024-09-20 17:31:47 | Re: Why mention to Oracle ? |