4 ms·
Except that there was (at that point) no option to learn Oracle because... it cost money. I was also using Postgres to do very similar things to Access. This i
by notauser 19y ago
Except that there was (at that point) no option to learn Oracle because... it cost money. I was also using Postgres to do very similar things to Access.
This is in a way part of my point about value. You wouldn't get very far proposing to use Oracle to run a five user app, and (although it has been done) only a lunatic would run a five thousand user app on Access. The price, capability and support options of Postgres are compatible with both (partly because it is open source), so you only have to learn one tool, and the time invested it has a longer life cycle too.
- sanswork 19y agoThat was my point. :) Oracle is to Postgres as Access is to OO Base. They can both is used to store data but they are hardly comparable so saying that learning Postgres was more valuable because Access 97 knowledge is useless is flawed. By the way up until 2005 when I removed all traces of vba work from my cv I was getting a lot of offers for Access 97-2K work which is almost the same.