| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matt Miller <mattm(at)epx(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT |
| Date: | 2005-09-02 16:41:24 |
| Message-ID: | 431880B4.5020804@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> I looked at EnterpriseDB a few months ago. The installation errored.
> It left stuff in /var/opt, which I consider non-standard for a Red Hat
> machine. The whole product just didn't feel clean to me. I admit
> that's a pretty limited and subjective evaluation, especially for a beta
> product, but I was in the mode of broadly evaluating alternatives, so I
> moved on. Maybe I need to look at it again.
>
> Basically I feel more secure tracking the core project, even if I need
> to maintain some of my own patches.
The EnterpriseDB guys have a final product now, and it's designed to
emulate Oracle as much as possible. I'd prefer that in production than
my own patches :)
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-02 16:47:43 | Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-09-02 15:56:48 | Re: REVOKE question |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-02 16:44:00 | Re: Proof of concept COLLATE support with patch |
| Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-09-02 15:53:00 | Re: Proof of concept COLLATE support with patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-02 16:47:43 | Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-09-02 14:54:45 | Re: PL/pgSQL: EXCEPTION NOSAVEPOINT |