back to article Google wants to takes a byte out of Oracle workloads with PostgreSQL migration service

Google is looking to capture some of Oracle's workloads by promising to help users migrate from Big Red's databases to PostgreSQL with a set of services and automation tools. Specifically, the Chocolate Factory wants to take users from Oracle databases to its managed PostgreSQL-compatible database service, AlloyDB. Among a …

  1. alain williams Silver badge

    Google just wants you in their cloud

    Even better would be running your data on your in-house servers - far more secure and will still work when the company broadband goes TITSUP.

    1. Youngone Silver badge

      Re: Google just wants you in their cloud

      In-house servers? What are you? Some sort of Luddite, Grandad?

      We love paying someone else to host all our data although they do seem to keep raising their prices now that they've got all our data on their servers.

      Hey, hang on!

  2. abend0c4

    SYSDATE from Oracle does not have an equivalent in PostgreSQL

    It has several possible equivalents, it's just that none of them is called SYSDATE.

    But just to highlight the problems of semantic conversion, if you need to refer to the date and time, should that be the time at which the time function (whatever its name) is executed, the time at which the statement containing the function is executed, the time at which the transaction containing the statement began execution - or something else?

    1. Hans 1

      Re: SYSDATE from Oracle does not have an equivalent in PostgreSQL

      You should not be using sysdate but systimestamp instead, anyway, bloody hell, need to get ready for pub day tomorrow, grabbing coat ...

      1. abend0c4

        Re: SYSDATE from Oracle does not have an equivalent in PostgreSQL

        Mostly, you probably want to use CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, which is the ANSI standard.

  3. Pierre 1970

    Yeah, right!

    The problem with this is that the suppliers of such "cheap" services trivializes the migration and operation efforts, as the changes that developers must take into account when switching RDBMS technologies. And all of the managers buy that without the slightest shade of doubt and the risks involved.

    In the short term they all look almost the same (all of them can manage a SELECT * FROM TABLE and adhere to the ANSI standards ) but then the issues arise and the lack of proper skills in the "free" DBs is enormous when you get into troubles.

    1. fandom

      Re: Yeah, right!

      Could that be what prompted the service mentioned in the last paragraph of the article?

      "In May, EDB launched a so-called "risk free" Oracle migration service in which customers signing a two-year contract to run a 64-core instance of PostgreSQL would not start paying until the new system is up and running and has been tested"

  4. mattaw2001

    ... sigh ... if you have a simple DB you are likely already off Oracle

    If you had a simple DB with simple queries happening then you have already migrated, unless that means re-qualifying costs etc.

    If you have taken "advantage" of any of the massive array of footguns sold by Oracle, followed by downing several glasses of their koolaid, then I downright disbelieve that a "wizard" will work. I just don't.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: ... sigh ... if you have a simple DB you are likely already off Oracle

      EnterpriseDB has been running the Oracle to Postgres transition for years. I think they have a PL/SQL backend which makes the prospect of all having to handle all those stored procedures less daunting, but it's still going to be to difficult persuading the C-suite, especially after their next round of golf with an Oracle VP…

  5. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

    Migrate from a hostile company that won't leave you alone to a hostile company that could turn off the product at any moment? I hadn't considered that Oracle might not be the worst option.

  6. razorfishsl

    Won't work....

    There are may oracle type things that just cannot be implemented in PostgreSQL.

    Then there is the potentially massive PLSQL code base that would need to be migrated in hte stored procedures...

    1. rafff

      Can't be done?

      If this is the product I think it is, then it can be done, and has been done for several years now - just not under the Google banner. PLSQL is a Turing complete language and can be converted into any other Turing complete language - provided the code does not dig into Oracle internals, and a couple of other caveats.. The translator is a full compiler with full semantic analysis and does a good job.

      That is not to say that there are not problems in "transpiling", but over 98% fully automatic conversion is generally possible. But AI it aint, just good old fashioned compiler technology..

    2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Such as? And which ones can't you implement yourself in Postgres via an extension? PL/SQL transition is already done by companies like EnterpriseDB.

  7. disgruntled yank Silver badge


    After enough meeting with sales teams, I understood that "legacy" means "that which we didn't sell you."

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not possible until it is

    We managed to migrate a not overly large but fairly complex couple of databases from Oracle to PLSQL. Belive me the business will accept some minor differences when they save $millions a year over what they were paying Oracle. The potential savings also help them quickly come up with funding to work out how to migrate.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like