On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Thom Brown<thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> That's going to depend a lot on how many features of the database you
>> were using...especially higher level features like stored procedures.
>> Converting the schema and the data shouldn't be too bad -- there are a
>> number of relatively easy ways to do it including microsoft DTS
>> levering the pg odbc driver.
>> The biggest change is going to be getting used to the new tools...if
>> you haven't already, i'd highly recommend mastering psql (don't lean
>> too much on pgadmin) and learning basic administration tasks like
>> restarting the database while active, killing particular backends,
>> backup strategies, etc. If the sql server installation is 2000 or
>> older, you should be able to port most things pretty easily except for
>> any t-sql procedures. PostgreSQL supports functions which are a
>> little different so some of the things you used to do in t-sql you may
>> have to do in sql scripts and an external scheduler such as cron.
>> Many things in PostgeSQL are easier than you might be used to...it's
>> got superior concurrency handing and a much better type system. Good
> Learning PostgreSQL isn't a problem since most of our database servers are
> Postgres. It's just an old database we want to convert.
> Thankfully we don't rely on DTS but I think there may be some refactoring of
> stored procedures into functions as some return multiple datasets.
you meant to say t-sql? DTS is data transformation services, you can
use it to do the one time schema and data converesions (it's not
perfect, but can be a time saver).
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Wang Kuo-Ying||Date: 2009-07-31 15:57:25|
|Subject: export csv file on XP|
|Previous:||From: Alvaro Herrera||Date: 2009-07-31 14:17:21|
|Subject: Re: Can I have a look at your TuningWizard generated