Seems to me this has already been answered well multiple times by multiple people; I’m not sure why this is such an issue, or one that warrants continued discussion.
No, I do not want to continue a discussion about a closed issue, I just want to improve DOCs, or get it cleaner, just that.
PostgreSQL lock modes and the LOCK TABLE syntax are compatible with those present in Oracle.
The SQL standard specifies that the key word SAVEPOINT is mandatory, but PostgreSQL and Oracle allow it to be omitted.
Applications written for Oracle frequently use a workaround involving the automatically generated rownum column, which is not available in PostgreSQL, to implement the effects of these clauses.
FOR can be replaced by IS for Oracle compatibility.
So, except for Data Type Formatting, because Postgres mimics Oracle version, and converting to PL/pgSQL, these other cases, and I don't know if other exists, the DOC says something that is specific to a database, so users which come from any other database could ask why not their database compatibility is shown too. So I think all these cases could be removed.
By your own admission, you wouldn’t see the value, where others who came from Oracle would. Additionally, your assumption is incorrect: many Oracle databases are migrated to Postgres, more-so today than when much of that was written.
I didn't say no more people are migrating from Oracle, I just say that maybe migrations are now coming from other databases, like SQL Server, MySQL, DB2, Firebird, Mongo and many others. So why do you document only for those which come from Oracle ?
New Postgres users are today 90% coming from Oracle or 10%, I think we cannot have this number exactly. And if nobody knows, why mention any of them ?
Thanks for your time and I repeat, I just want to get Postgres DOCs better, just that.
regards
Marcos
