"Daniel Morgan" <dmorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message
news:3D938351.E4630428_at_exesolutions.com...
> Christoph Seidel wrote:
>
> > yes, this is the name :-)
> >
> > "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-family_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> > news:YUEk9.451742$_91.643468_at_rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> > > I think you mean the migration work bench. You can download it from
> > > otn.oracle.com
>
> That being said the migration workbench is just the very first step in a
> process that will require you to modify your code. There is no other way
> unless data corruption, poor performance, a lack of scalability, and
> minimal security are acceptable.
>
> The architecture differences between Oracle and SQL Server are vast. While
> the code produced by Migration Workbench is compilable code. It is only a
> starting point.
>
> Among the critical differences are things in the Oracle word referred to
> by the following phrases:
>
> 1. Multiversioning
> 2. Readers don't block writers
> 3. Writers don't block readers
> 4. Unlimited locks
> 5. Bind variables
>
> If you don't understand these concepts and modify your code accordingly it
> will suffer greatly. I would suggest to you a small investment in Tom
> Kyte's book "Expert one-on-one Oracle" and especially the first three
> chapters.
>
> Daniel Morgan
>
Agreed. If this is a serious project, I'd recommend re-engineering; not
migration.
Paul
Received on Sun Sep 29 2002 - 16:12:42 CDT
