Re: Is Oracle deliberately difficult?

Interestingly enough, I found Oracle's nuts and bolts and concepts much easier to learn and understand. I thought Oracle was more straight forward. I spent a few years under the Sybase's "hood" and then some under SQL Server's (6.5 and 7). I thought Oracle's server architecture was complex, yet everything made sense to me right away, it was intuitive. Also, the dictionary views in Oracle are simple and easy to use (very human readable and understandable, in my opinion). With Sybase and SQL Server, the architecture took longer to figure out and then required periodic refreshing of my mind. That usually speaks to a certain lack of intuitiveness in the design. Querying the system tables also got pretty complicated quite often. In SQL Server, though, there are a lot less system tables than there are views in Oracle's dictionary. However, Oracle has some features that SQL Server doesn't, like parallel query execution, and, naturally, Oracle provides additional views for that.

Sergey Bloom

In article <39AAD6A9.5540_at_virgin.net>,
  sid.james_at_virgin.net wrote:
> I've been learning Oracle for a while now and I do think of it as
 quite
> challenging in an enjoyable way. I don't use Enterprise Manager, I'd
> rather get to to know the 'nuts and bolts'. However, having done a SQL
> Server administrator's course, I can't help thinking that Oracle is
> rather more difficult to use than maybe it should be.
>
> Sensible, rational responses that shoot me up in flames are always
> preferable!
>
> e d
>

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Thu Aug 31 2000 - 10:00:57 CDT