6 ms·

Usually the only good reason is because you already have developed lot of experience with with it. I'm just saying it's not as bad because it's quite a bit eas

Usually the only good reason is because you already have developed lot of experience with with it. I'm just saying it's not as bad because it's quite a bit easier to switch a database than to switch a game engine.

dan_mctree 3y ago
For a lot of companies, switching databases is effectively impossible. Perhaps not quite as impossible as switching game engines, but certainly impossible enough that it would kill the business. A lot of companies use database specific functionality that's far from trivial to replicate in another database. A lot of that database specific functionality can also be legacy that no one really understands anymore. Migrating without an option to keep these poorly understood but critical systems will set you up for unexpected data loss, corruption or availability issues. And that's after spending a year on your migration. If Oracle pulls anything like Unity here, this will kill off a lot of companies
- bgirard 3y ago
  It took Amazon several years to migrate away from Oracle: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/migration-complete-amazons-consumer-business-just-turned-off-its-final-oracle-database/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/migration-complete-amazons-...
BlueTemplar 3y ago
Yeah, also that's why the article's Word and Google Docs example strikes me as weird : you shouldn't be using these either, for similar reasons !
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  Yeah, but LibreOffice is the perfect example on why people pass up on Open Source projects.
  - BlueTemplar 3y ago
    What do you mean ?
zymhan 3y ago
> it's quite a bit easier to switch a database than to switch a game engine _presses X to doubt_