3 ms·
I manage Oracle and Postgresql instances and I agree with this, except for one small thing: Postgresql doesn't have packages. Otherwise, it is much simpler to
by forinti 7y ago
I manage Oracle and Postgresql instances and I agree with this, except for one small thing: Postgresql doesn't have packages.
Otherwise, it is much simpler to manage than Oracle (which really is a system turned inside out). The documentation is really good and straight to the point (Oracle can't help but turn everything into an ad - nvl uses the best null handling technology on the market and such).
- mulmen 7y agoI spent many years on Oracle. I do not miss smug Tom Kyte blog posts about the pointlessness of BOOLEANs. Nor do I miss endless hours Googling around Burleson Consulting pages because we couldn’t afford support. I do kinda miss how easy it was to do partitioning but I’m on Redshift now so it doesn’t matter.
- fullstop 7y agoOh, man, that shirtless guy. Thanks for putting that back into my mind!
- dangerbird2 7y agoWhile not having packages isn't a huge deal for new projects, it can be a pretty huge stumbling block for dbas who want to migrate from Oracle to Postgres, but need an easy way to port their pl/sql code to pgpl/sql. Most of the syntactic differenes (like pgplqsl code needing to be delimited as a string) can be automated, or handed off to a junior programmer. Not being able to use Oracle's package system would require some major refactoring to how you organize your functions and procedures