Re: New Oracle system in our house, migration chances

czw., 13 sty 2022 o 17:04 Achilleas Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>
napisał(a):

> 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>
> 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?
>
>
> ok, then sorry for the confusion. I interpreted the answer from Michael
Vitale asking for the version etc. as it would be an ISV which has not
matched with your statement. So in that case I also do vote for A :)