Re: Advise needed: Can I use/learn Oracle quickly?

Paul wrote:

> I looked up the list of features that you provided, and yes, it is true
> that Interbase/Firebird doesn't provide them (I couldn't find utl_file
> or utl_smtp in Oracle Essentials or Effective Oracle by Design).

Books are a bad place to look for built-in packages.

> However, with respect, these features are not necessary for many
> applications, and are overkill for many small to medium organisations.

I would disagree. Sending emails from inside your database when an error occurs and other similar functionality is basic functionality such as that provided by HTF and HTP is very basic these days.

> I would compare Oracle and Interbase/Firebird to, say, a Maybach and
> your trusty old Volkswagen Golf (Rabbit in US?). The Maybach will get
> you to your destination quickly, and in style with loads of features,
> but if you just want to go down to the shop for a carton of milk, why
> not take the Golf?

Bad analogy. Both will do what you want. How about an example where one doesn't do what you want. What if the job is picking up a piano?

> Interbase/Firebird will run on Linux boxes with AFAIK, just 16 MB of RAM
> (may even be just 8) - could you do that with Oracle?

I couldn't even find a vendor that would sell me a computer with that small an amount of RAM if I offered them a premium price.

> You may see Interbase/Firebird as just "3x5 cards", but it has DRI,
> triggers, a stored procedure language, User Defined Functions - a whole
> raft of stuff, and this all fits into a very small neat package, with
> the corresponding benefit of simplicity of administration - i.e. there
> is none (apart from a cron job run at 03:00 every night).

Not at all. I think Firebird has its place. I'm not sure what advantage it offers over MySQL though ... which is a far more valid comparison. Comparing a triicycle to a Ferrari is a bit unfair. Why not compare the tricycle to a bicycle?

> Yes, Oracle is admirable in its breath of features, but I would have to
> argue that from an engineering perspective, so is Interbase/Firebird,
> for being able to fit in so much into such a small and elegant package.

And I'd argue that Lotus 123 version 2.01 is still better the latest version of MS Excel. Provided, of course, you don't need a lot of graphing and other advanced capabilities. If you don't need Oracle then don't spend the $700 or so dollars. And if the PCs you are using have 8-16K of RAM I'd suggest you not even try.

> If I were managing France Télécom or some other huge entity, then Oracle
> running on some form of Unix would be my db of choice. For less than 500
> users, I would seriously look at other options.
>
> Paul...

If you have 500 users and can't afford the Oracle license and can't appreciate the advantages in performance, security, and capabilities Oracle provides then perhaps you should go back and re-evaluate 3x5 cards. ;-)

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)