give me my membership welcome pack and free member's t-shirt
S
smallguy78
@smallguy78
0
Reputation
2
Posts
70
Profile views
0
Followers
0
Following
Best posts made by smallguy78
This user hasn't posted anything yet.
Latest posts made by smallguy78
-
RE: Official Membership Thread -- Just Reply Here!
-
RE: Why the I-Hate-Oracle Club?Lots of fault-tolerant software is written in ADA (ADA was developed for the US military), in particular software for trains. Its also used in missile guidance systems, I have a friend who uses it for this.That doesn't mean it's suitable as a database language, as a language for a database should be forgiving of errors, in my view.In a previous company we paid around $2k for one day of an Oracle consultant's time, to install Oracle on solaris. Now compare this to mySQL, postgres, db2, where an experienced shell user can install it with very little problems. And of course SQL Server could be installed by my gran, and easily configured too. Because it's easy to configure doesn't mean it's not powerful, it's just been well designed and thought about, not slowly added to.The standard bundled tools for it are horrendous, there is very little argument against this statement, as far as I can see. Ditch Java, rewrite them in c++ and you may be getting somewhere. Or maybe my experience with the gui is a complaint about the direness of java as a language for writing GUIs.It doesn't self optimise well, unlike SQL Server, and again returns to the consultant point, a kind of closed circle of 'free masons' who are the only able ones to do this. The database should be the one optimising, its the one that knows about itself better than any dba.Admittedly TSQL is poorer than PL/SQL in terms of power, although this year's Whidbey release and SQL Server 2005 will address this.The minimum specs for a windows install for 9i, iirc was 512mb ram. Compare this to MSDE, mySQL, Postgres. Even SQL Server standard edition. I'd love to see a reasoned argument in favour of Oracle, explaining why so much shit is bundled with it, and why it requires 2gb of space. Surely the obvious answer is, the majority of it is bloatware, used by extreme-case users such as Walmart.Incidently, most of SQL Server is Sybase code (large chunks rewritten for NT), which may account for it being a superior product [:P].In terms of doing the basic task of storing and retrieving data Oracle is slow cludgey bloatware. It may have better features for huge databases such as clusturing (although I've seen this argued in favour of SQL Server, which optimises itself for clustering itself), but the days of enormous (single machine) mainframes are gone, I'd make the broad sweeping statement that the majority of people out there want something that is intuitive and fast to develop with, so they can actually get ROI, and not spend it all on a consultant, installing the damn thing!