Re: Oracle vs. PostgreSQL - a comment

On 6/1/20 4:58 AM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
[snip]
> As a developer (and part time DBA) I have a hard time thinking of any Oracle
> feature that I'm missing in PostgreSQL.

The inability to do a point-in-time restoration of a *single* database in a
multi-db cluster is a serious -- and fundamental -- missing feature (never
to be implemented because of the fundamental design).

In SQL Server, it's trivial to restore -- including differentials and WAL
files -- an old copy of a prod database *to a different name* so that you
now have databases FOO and FOO_OLD in the same instance.

In Postgres, though, you've got to create a new cluster using a new port
number (which in our case means sending a firewall request through channels
and waiting two weeks while the RISK team approves opening the port -- and
they might decline it because it's non-standard -- and then the Network team
creates a /change order/ and then implements it).

Bottom line: something I can do in an afternoon with SQL Server takes two
weeks for Postgres.

This has given Postgres a big, fat black eye with our end users.

--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.