Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle
Date
Msg-id 1160613519.31966.77.camel@dogma.v10.wvs
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle  (Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>)
List pgsql-advocacy
On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 20:18 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> I'm not sure why people in this community are so quick to label anyone who is
> less than glowing about postgresql as "the enemy", but it's really annoying.

I didn't take the "with friends like these..." comment literally, but I
see how many people would interpret that to mean he's an enemy, which he
isn't.

> Maybe these guys were thinking about things like the ability to return
> multiple resultsets and/or the ability to do multiple transactions within a
> stored procedure; both of which are functionality that Oracle and SQL Server
> devotee's have been enjoying for years... (for the curious, see relevant
> threads in the -hackers archives about implementation proposals to add these
> features that as of yet have not gotten off the ground)

I don't think it's fair to say "not gotten off the ground". Most of the
use cases that people were concerned about with multiple transactions in
a function/procedure were solved with the addition of savepoints. I
understand that people still want procedures that are executed outside
any other transactions, but I think significant progress was made
responding to many of the needs. I understand your point though.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis


pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Robert Treat
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. SQL Server, Oracle