Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Franck Pachot
Subject Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment
Date
Msg-id CAK6ito1WuYnUh9hSrvzUd=MVOwBMtqYsAeNBJw9w7c1FgvaBow@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment  (Jeremy Schneider <schnjere@amazon.com>)
Responses Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment
List pgsql-general
>> Did Oracle change this?  Last time I looked, I don't think Oracle supported local redo in their multitenant architecture either.
Hi Jeremy, they are moving in this direction (project seems to be called DGPDB internally). And what is interesting for this discussion is that they initially had redo (and even undo) at instance level, but moved this to PDB following what users were asking for: pdb level flashback, pitr, switchover,...But it is hard to compare those needs with PostgreSQL. Multiple db clusters in PG is lightweight and is the right place to isolate (users, cgroups,...). Oracle CDB is too heavy to have multiple on one host. And many isolation features is made at PDB level (lockdown profiles, resource manager)

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: asli cokay
Date:
Subject: finding and monitoring old WAL archives
Next
From: Jeremy Schneider
Date:
Subject: Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment