On Wednesday 03 September 2008 09:17:54 Asko Oja wrote: > 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: > > > 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. > > > > Yes, but it is also far more complex to install, configure, and use, > > compared > > 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. It is not as simple as Oracles database link syntax. Setting up a connection involves a couple of sql looking commands, and once you setup a connection to a remote database, you can reference a table with something like select * from mytable@myotherdb. There's no way a function oriented solution can match that imho. (BTW, if you want to see more, Lewis has a pretty good write up; http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/oracle-guide/database-links-a-definition-in-plain-english-7023) -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
