Re: MOS: Mystifying the user community (SR #3-1090025121: Report Issue with this site)

From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:35:10 +0000
Message-ID: <7765c8970912101235s70928ce7hf503b7c9b39bc117_at_mail.gmail.com>

I'm afraid I see no evidence at all that any data modellers were let anywhere near the new MOS. plenty of UI people though. I'm afraid the internal error messages that seem to pop up from time to time, well Ok at least once a week, tend to evidence this. Still next time someone suggests that "flash" in the english sense websites scale we know where to point them.

Niall

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Jared Still <jkstill_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Bill Ferguson <wbfergus_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> but the current design is
>> that technical SR's and non-technical SR's are in different tables
>> (presumably for perfomance issues), hence the current requirement to
>> specify through that funky pencil filter, what kind of SR's you want
>> to view.
>>
>>
> Gee, partitioning wasn't in the budget?
>
> All sarcasm aside, it would be my guess (yes, 'guess' as there
> are no facts forthcoming to base this on) that the developers and
> database designers did want to use partitions, but were working
> under constraints (time probably) that disallowed updating the
> legacy design to the extent required to merge the data.
>
> If so, not a good decision IMO.
>
> Jared Still
> Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist
> Oracle Blog: http://jkstill.blogspot.com
> Home Page: http://jaredstill.com
>
>

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Thu Dec 10 2009 - 14:35:10 CST