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

From: Herald ten Dam <>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 07:13:06 +0100
Message-ID: <BACE06B587FB3C47AC31296417C11434016C13E64A85_at_thnms004.TheHumanNetwork.local>


I was directly thinking of the term Toon Koppelaars introduced: YAFET, see

Herald ten Dam

Van: [] namens Niall Litchfield [] Verzonden: donderdag 10 december 2009 21:35 Aan:
CC:;; Peter Hitchman; oracle-l Onderwerp: Re: MOS: Mystifying the user community (SR #3-1090025121: Report Issue with this site)

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.


On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Jared Still <<>> wrote: On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Bill Ferguson <<>> 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:<> Home Page:<>


Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA

-- Received on Fri Dec 11 2009 - 00:13:06 CST

Original text of this message