Thread: PostgreSQL 7.1 and ORACLE 8.x
Hello everybody out there,
does anybody of you have experience with PostgreSQL 7.1 and
ORACLE 8.x running simultaneously on the same server (Linux:
Kernel 2.2.16), and could they be connected in any way to share
some data ?
As a beginner in client-server achitectured databases ( I only
have a couple of years experience in programming PARADOX
& ACCES databases), I also have the question, where are the
main differences - except there is an open source software on
the one hand and a commercial on the other - between these two
databases?
What does make ORACLE to be the first choice ?
Under what kind of circumstances could be PostgreSQL the first
choice ?
After all: What are the main missing functions in PostgreSQL to
put it to the same level as ORACLE - or does it still be ?
If not: Will there be a chance in the near future, that I can
supersede an ORACLE- database with a PostgreSQL one, under
any circumstances ?
I really don't want to start a database flame; all I want to get is a
general overview based upon your experience - and yes, I have
read the manuals allready, but maybe not everything in detail :-).
Thank´s for care and for helping me along
Kind regards
Axel
"In a world without walls and fences,
who needs windows and gates?"
Hi All
Correct me if I'm wrong
Oracle features not yet on postgresql
Good Backup utilities, Backup backup API (compare the speed of a large dump
on oracle to postgresql)
Binary (fast) dump utility
fine grained control of the filesystem layout from within the DB
fine grained control of table spaces
fine grained control of how the table_space grows ie no increase, increase
by an decreasing/increasing amounts etc.
Parrellel server (cluster storing a single DB) Allowing some queries to be
sped up by throwing more machines at the problem.
Threaded db backend allowing some queries to be speed up by throwing more
processors at the problem.
As far as I'm concerned thats about it. Currently the only ones that I would
like to see fixed in the short term would be Online Backups followed by
backups in general. The rest of the stuff on this list is not needed by 99%
of people (but still nice to point to).
What makes oracle the first choice is that by recommending it you use the
"Nobody got fired for buying IBM" school, it is expensive, support is good
and the CEO has heard of it.
If you do use postgresql. Make sure that other people appreciate the
alternatives and their cost beforehand, present it as a calculated risk, you
are taking a risk on a technology that can give your company a competitive
edge however as it is a new technology that may not have been tested in the
role that you're anticipating. Be aggressive but don't be blinkered by your
preference as well.
Postgresql is a great product and very close to being a 24*7 product I don't
think it quiet there yet.
Postgresql is more advanced in a number of areas as well
--
Ian Willis
-----Original Message-----
From: Pätzke Axel (external)
[mailto:Axel.Paetzke.external@kst.siemens.de]
Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2001 5:11 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL 7.1 and ORACLE 8.x
Hello everybody out there,
does anybody of you have experience with PostgreSQL 7.1 and
ORACLE 8.x running simultaneously on the same server (Linux:
Kernel 2.2.16), and could they be connected in any way to share
some data ?
As a beginner in client-server achitectured databases ( I only
have a couple of years experience in programming PARADOX
& ACCES databases), I also have the question, where are the
main differences - except there is an open source software on
the one hand and a commercial on the other - between these two
databases?
What does make ORACLE to be the first choice ?
Under what kind of circumstances could be PostgreSQL the first
choice ?
After all: What are the main missing functions in PostgreSQL to
put it to the same level as ORACLE - or does it still be ?
If not: Will there be a chance in the near future, that I can
supersede an ORACLE- database with a PostgreSQL one, under
any circumstances ?
I really don't want to start a database flame; all I want to get is a
general overview based upon your experience - and yes, I have
read the manuals allready, but maybe not everything in detail :-).
Thank´s for care and for helping me along
Kind regards
Axel
"In a world without walls and fences,
who needs windows and gates?"
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
You might add to that: No limit on #transactions before dump/restore Better language support (Java, Perl, etc) Jon johnnyb6@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Willis, Ian (Ento, Canberra) wrote: > Hi All > Correct me if I'm wrong > Oracle features not yet on postgresql > > Good Backup utilities, Backup backup API (compare the speed of a large dump > on oracle to postgresql) > Binary (fast) dump utility > fine grained control of the filesystem layout from within the DB > fine grained control of table spaces > fine grained control of how the table_space grows ie no increase, increase > by an decreasing/increasing amounts etc. > Parrellel server (cluster storing a single DB) Allowing some queries to be > sped up by throwing more machines at the problem. > Threaded db backend allowing some queries to be speed up by throwing more > processors at the problem. > > As far as I'm concerned thats about it. Currently the only ones that I would > like to see fixed in the short term would be Online Backups followed by > backups in general. The rest of the stuff on this list is not needed by 99% > of people (but still nice to point to). > > What makes oracle the first choice is that by recommending it you use the > "Nobody got fired for buying IBM" school, it is expensive, support is good > and the CEO has heard of it. > If you do use postgresql. Make sure that other people appreciate the > alternatives and their cost beforehand, present it as a calculated risk, you > are taking a risk on a technology that can give your company a competitive > edge however as it is a new technology that may not have been tested in the > role that you're anticipating. Be aggressive but don't be blinkered by your > preference as well. > > Postgresql is a great product and very close to being a 24*7 product I don't > think it quiet there yet. > > Postgresql is more advanced in a number of areas as well > > > > > > -- > Ian Willis > > -----Original Message----- > From: P�tzke Axel (external) > [mailto:Axel.Paetzke.external@kst.siemens.de] > Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2001 5:11 PM > To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Subject: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL 7.1 and ORACLE 8.x > > > Hello everybody out there, > > does anybody of you have experience with PostgreSQL 7.1 and > ORACLE 8.x running simultaneously on the same server (Linux: > Kernel 2.2.16), and could they be connected in any way to share > some data ? > > As a beginner in client-server achitectured databases ( I only > have a couple of years experience in programming PARADOX > & ACCES databases), I also have the question, where are the > main differences - except there is an open source software on > the one hand and a commercial on the other - between these two > databases? > > What does make ORACLE to be the first choice ? > Under what kind of circumstances could be PostgreSQL the first > choice ? > > After all: What are the main missing functions in PostgreSQL to > put it to the same level as ORACLE - or does it still be ? > If not: Will there be a chance in the near future, that I can > supersede an ORACLE- database with a PostgreSQL one, under > any circumstances ? > > > I really don't want to start a database flame; all I want to get is a > general overview based upon your experience - and yes, I have > read the manuals allready, but maybe not everything in detail :-). > > Thank�s for care and for helping me along > Kind regards > Axel > > "In a world without walls and fences, > who needs windows and gates?" > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) >
> No limit on #transactions before dump/restore What is that limit ? Is Postgres limited in such way ? NH
Earlier posts by Tom Lane indicated that when 32 bits are taken up, you have to dump/restore your database (actually, you have to do that before they are all gone). Gnome calculator shows 2^32 being 4,294,967,296, or roughly 4 billion transactions. This doesn't really matter in the medium-size database department (if you get there let me know), but in the higher-end it could be a problem. Tom suggested a dump/restore when pg_log got near 1 gig. Jon johnnyb6@sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Nicolas Huillard wrote: > > No limit on #transactions before dump/restore > > What is that limit ? Is Postgres limited in such way ? > > NH > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org >