Re: Migration to Postgres training
- From: Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 16:21:35 -0400
On 8/8/19 2:44 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
If you are looking for a single in box solution to solve all your
needs, it is true that Postgres won't necessarily service your needs.
However, to address the two specific points:
No "in-memory": PostgreSQL has unlogged tables. It also works
wonderfully with any number of in-memory solutions such as redis or
It's not the same: the in-memory solution developed by IBM and Oracle
maintains both the classic block/row storage and columnar storage in
memory. So called in-memory technique is not just a bigger cache, it's a
data warehouse technology. Unlogged tables or memcached are simply
Partitioning: This gets better every release. Version 10 was o.k., 11
was much better, and 12 is even better. Pretty much the only thing
missing as of 12 is the global indexes. However, you can have Primary
Keys per partition with 12.
I'll have to check it up. I have played with Pg11 but not with Pg12.
However, the lack of global indexes is a crucial feature.
It all depends on your specific needs but PostgreSQL can usually
service 100% of 95% of Oracle users needs.
That's a very brave statement. How did you come up with those numbers?
Does PgSQL have its own version of TDE? How about fine-grained auditing?
Do you have a tool like EM Express built into the database? How do
compare your backups to rman backups?
Don't get me wrong, Postgres is a nice OSS database but is not as
feature rich as Oracle. Not even remotely so. I have been doing projects
where people expressed the desire to get off Oracle and start using
something else. Postgres was in play with 2 companies, but I've had the
most of success with DB2 which can match Oracle on feature by feature
basis and is significantly cheaper. I like Postgres, but so called
migration projects should be done vewy, vewy cawefully.
Other related posts: