On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 6:51 PM Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Haughty lectures about "Oracle has it" not being good enough could > hardly be more out of place here. To put it as politely as is possible > in this case, shut your pie hole. What Jeff is asking for is not > something that "Oracle has", it's something that customers want. That > was the case few years ago when I was asking for the optimizer hints. I > was castigated by the former pastry baker turned Postgres guru and my > reaction was simple: I threw Postgres out of the company that I was a > working for as the lead DBA. You see, customer is always right, whether > the database is open source or not. Needless to say, Postgres has > optimizer hints these days. It still has them in "we do not want" part > of the Wiki, which is hilarious. In all sincerity: Chill out. I don't think that this is worth getting into an argument over. I think that there is a good chance that you'd have had a much better experience if the conversation had been in person. Text has a way of losing a lot of important nuance. I have personally met and enjoyed talking to quite a few people that personally worked on Oracle, in various capacities -- the world of database internals experts is not huge. I find Tanel Poder very interesting, too -- never met the man, but we follow each other on Twitter. Oracle is a system that has some interesting properties in general (not just as a counterpoint to PostgreSQL), and I definitely respect it. Same with SQL Server. There are lots of smart and accomplished people in the world, including Jeff. I think that it's worth understanding these differences in perspective. There is likely to be merit in all of the specific points made by both Laurenze and Jeff. They may not be irreconcilable, or anything like it. -- Peter Geoghegan
