[Tsarbomb]

Not to poop all over what you said, but I went through the history of some the previous comments you made to communicate the power and features of Oracle and I have simple question to ask you: Is it possible you are unfamiliar with the full features and capabilities of Postgresql?

[radiator]

This is most probable. Oracle specialists tend to be people who have been working with Oracle and Oracle only for the past years, if not decades. They could never possibly have a knowledge of the full functionality of Postgres, which coincidentally changes rapidly.

[rconti]

Couldn't this also be said about, say, Postgres specialists?

[radiator]

Not the same percentage of them. Postgres has been used for a shorter time in large companies. Many experts in Postgres were previously experts in another DBMS.

In contrast, most Oracle DBAs/Engineers publish the fact that they have only used this specific product during their whole career. They seem to be rather proud of the fact, actually.

[ibejoeb]

Like what?

[Tsarbomb]

Picking one of your previous comments at random where you use the examples of pattern matching and analytic functions... yea postgresql does that too.

[ibejoeb]

Why did you leave out the thing it doesn't have? That's what we're talking about, after all.

https://docs.oracle.com/database/121/DWHSG/sqlmodel.htm#DWHS...

[zaphar]

What thing, I looked briefly through your link and didn't see anything that I can't get via Postgres. I'm sure there are probably some very niche things that work differently and make Oracle a compelling choice,n but you haven't actually listed one yet.

[carlmcqueen]

Oracle people tend to be heavy oracle people too.

At the bank I worked before 2019 at I was on a advanced analytic team, we had this amazing teradata database and then there were these insanely fast (yet older) IBM DB2 databases and then there was a few big oracle databases.

We did amazing things with teradata + DB2 and then a leader who was tired of multiple databases asked us to vote, we chose teradata so we went with oracle and the migration was so bad I left.

[Tsarbomb]

They for some reason are refusing to prove the affirmative of their statement that there are things Oracle can do that Postgres cannot; which leads back to my original question, that they may simply not know Postgres.

[slt2021]

1. oracle's query planner/optimizer is smarter and more efficient, especially with complex query. postgres for quite some time did not do well with nested, lateral queries with CTEs that include views - it's performance would randomly degrade on complex queries, which is rarer thing in oracle world.

CTE expression is an optimization fence in postgres, which is not the case in oracle.

2. oracle does not need vacuum, unlike postgres

3. postgres has problems with many concurrent connections, thats why you need workarounds like pgbouncer. Oracle doesnt need that.

And same picture with almost any other feature - it is sort of "works" in postgres - but with crutches/workarounds, while in Oracle - stuff just works out of the box.

You dont need to search and install some obscure opensource extension to get the thing you want working, like you do in postgres world. and then keep updating that extension with every new version, etc

[braingenious]

I think they mentioned SQL modelling being part of the core software.

[bobkazamakis]

You seem to be talking about what Postgres doesn't have as an argument for choosing Oracle. This hasn't really shown why postgres was a poor choice or why Oracle was the better one.