Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Justin Clift
Subject Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime
Date
Msg-id 3B77D556.8EC5DA4B@postgresql.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime  (Vince Vielhaber <vev@michvhf.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi Vince,

The point I'll make is this :

People who presently have installations on Oracle will be more inclined
to test/trial PostgreSQL if they know the learning curve is much less
than say, migrating to DB2 would be (or some other database without
specific Oracle-transition compatibilities).

Sure, they might move their installations to
PostgreSQL-with-an-Oracle-like-parser and then never convert them to
pure PostgreSQL.  So?  Does it matter?  Probably not, they're still
using PostgreSQL.  I'm pretty sure over time newer projects and
installations would become more PostgreSQL oriented as the DBA's gained
more experience and understanding of PostgreSQL's strengths.  i.e. 
"Chalk up a win."

Vince Vielhaber wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Justin Clift wrote:
> 
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Not sure if Peter was joking, but Ian's approach sounds much more
> > user-friendly.
> >
> > Getting Oracle users to convert to PostgreSQL then be "stuck-with-it"
> > because they can't afford the migration elsewhere is not the right
> > approach.
> 
> If you think that people are going to flock to PostgreSQL from Oracle
> simply because it's a drop in replacement, I want some of whatever it
> is you're drinking!

If PostgreSQL was truly a drop-in-replacement then cost and good
reputation (especially over the coming years) would mean a lot of places
would use us instead of Oracle.  Presently though, we're not a
drop-in-replacement.

> An Oracle compatibility mode wouldn't be a bad idea, but at what cost
> and at how much effort?  What are you going to do with incompatible
> reserved words?  Who do you expect to do it?  How soon?  I've seen
> alot of projects try to make themselves "user-friendly" only to suffer
> in the end from what they lost in the effort.

The cost and effort is purely voluntary.  :)  i.e. $0-ish cost, and
heaps of effort.

> Personally I'd prefer a PostgreSQL that was as SQL92 and beyond as it
> could possibly be rather than some of this and some of that.

I don't see how having alternate parsers available, maintained and
updated by those interested in them, is a bad thing.  Certainly don't
see how it detracts from the main effort.

???

> Vince.
> --
> ==========================================================================
> Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH    email: vev@michvhf.com    http://www.pop4.net
>          56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
>         Online Campground Directory    http://www.camping-usa.com
>        Online Giftshop Superstore    http://www.cloudninegifts.com
> ==========================================================================

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

-- 
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."    - Indira Gandhi


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gavin Sherry
Date:
Subject: Re: example program bug?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: example program bug?