On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 5:56 AM, Robert Treat <xzilla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tuesday 02 September 2008 17:21:12 Asko Oja wrote:Yes, but it is also far more complex to install, configure, and use, compared
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Michael Nolan <htfoot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Oracle handles connecting to multiple databases (even on multiple/remote
> > computers) fairly seamlessly, PG does not (yet.)
>
> Stuff we do with plProxy on PostgreSQL is in some respects more advanced
> than anything Oracle has to offer :) We have hundreds of databases in quite
> complex network of remote calls and replication.
>
to something simple like oracle's dblink, which comes pre-installed, is
simple to set-up, and has a much more straight-forward syntax for use in day
to day query work.
We are working on these matters and hopefully get some of them solved in 8.4 :)
Configure and use part is NO more complex than Oracle and has several use cases for which neither of dblinks is suitable.
Or are you claiming that calling functions is not straight forward and seamless in PostgreSQL.
But yes getting plProxy into the database might be the hurdle for many potential users.
Configure and use part is NO more complex than Oracle and has several use cases for which neither of dblinks is suitable.
Or are you claiming that calling functions is not straight forward and seamless in PostgreSQL.
But yes getting plProxy into the database might be the hurdle for many potential users.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
