| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: More spfile goodness
> And if it was an XML file would you still complain so vociferously? :)
Not at all. Config files are if anything the perfect application for
XML.
> I think the point of not making the SPFILE directly editable is just a
secu=
> rity thing.
No way! Security is one thing, provided by the OS. Obfuscation is a totally different one, provided by Oracle with the SPFILE, by M$ with the silly registry "hives" and by just about NOBODY else. Because as an excuse for "security", it's worn out ages ago...
> As T. Rex (also known as T. Gorman) mentioned in a different r=
> esponse, I can see more and more things being done based on the need to
mak=
> e life easier 1. for the DBA's and 2. for the people who have to look
after=
> a database that aren't a DBA's rear end (of which we're seeing more and
mo=
> re, don't you agree?) =
Absolutely. Now please: in what way does that make using XML for config files (instead of binary) less desirable? Or text for that matter?
I don't recall "end users" reading ANY files, let alone XML or binary or text. Bugger, they can't read a screen unless it has a "rich multimedia" interface, whatever the heck that means!
Let alone care what format is used behind the scenes? "What's a format and why do I need one" is the general attitude we're dealing with here...
That has got NOTHING to do with the technique used to store the data. The two things are not related in any way shape or format.
Or do you seriously think when a rep approaches a prospect and 'splains Oracle is "secure and easy to use" because its config is binary, (s)he is not gonna get laughed at? Like: who cares?
> For the actual details of WHY an SPFILE was created in binary form, you'd
n=
> eed to talk to the developer who made that decision. Not me, no idea who
i=
I'd like to think Oracle has grown big enough to go past the stage where
developers made such decisions. SOMEONE must be in charge of overall
design,
unlike in the bad old days. This can't be just a duhveloper...
>t is. My whole point with the SPFILE is that for some reason, there are
pe=
>ople like hjr and Nuno (and now I have to add Tim to the list ;) who have
a=
> deep philosophical disagreement with the existence of the SPFILE. I'm
too=
I couldn't care less if it is called SPFILE or BURGERFILE, quite frankly. As for the format, make it "transversely-proportional with multi-dimensional crystallography", for all I care.
But do NOT leave me with a half-baked solution where I end up having to
maintain
TWO files, one the weirdo with weirder bugs, the other good old text! And
if you
have to change something that has worked perfectly for eons, then do so
using
modern technology and design, not mainframe obfuscation!
That's the depth of my philosophy for today.
> That's three emails in an hour I've diss'ed Nuno on now, I better D&R very
=
> very fast! ;)
You can run. But you can't hide! :)
Cheers
Nuno Souto
in sunny Sydney, Australia
dbvision_at_optusnet.com.au
-- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------Received on Fri May 07 2004 - 05:19:51 CDT
 |
 |