Re: options for standby database
From: David Fitzjarrell <oratune_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1402428687.44579.YahooMailNeo_at_web124703.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Deprecating a functionality that's replaced by a greater functionality is fine, but I do agree that for those using Streams that now need to switch to Golden Gate some sort of reduced licensing cost should be implemented. Of course, that's MY opinion. David Fitzjarrell Principal author, "Oracle Exadata Survival Guide" On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 1:07 PM, Rich Jesse <rjoralist3_at_society.servebeer.com> wrote: David replies: > Why are you surprised? I've seen this coming for a while now. Besides, if > Golden Gate surpasses Streams in functionality (which, I believe, it does) > it makes sense to deprecate functionality that's merely a subset of another > product. Surprised? No. But from the customer's perspective, we now have to pay (a LOT) extra for functionality that was removed. It should be comp'ed for existing licensing. The inability to do on-the-fly compression for exports (expdp vs exp) without the Advanced Compression license is one that constantly bites my backside. My $.02 ($.01 after paying my extra Oracle licensing), Rich -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:31:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1402428687.44579.YahooMailNeo_at_web124703.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Deprecating a functionality that's replaced by a greater functionality is fine, but I do agree that for those using Streams that now need to switch to Golden Gate some sort of reduced licensing cost should be implemented. Of course, that's MY opinion. David Fitzjarrell Principal author, "Oracle Exadata Survival Guide" On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 1:07 PM, Rich Jesse <rjoralist3_at_society.servebeer.com> wrote: David replies: > Why are you surprised? I've seen this coming for a while now. Besides, if > Golden Gate surpasses Streams in functionality (which, I believe, it does) > it makes sense to deprecate functionality that's merely a subset of another > product. Surprised? No. But from the customer's perspective, we now have to pay (a LOT) extra for functionality that was removed. It should be comp'ed for existing licensing. The inability to do on-the-fly compression for exports (expdp vs exp) without the Advanced Compression license is one that constantly bites my backside. My $.02 ($.01 after paying my extra Oracle licensing), Rich -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Tue Jun 10 2014 - 21:31:27 CEST