Re: Bad Generalisations by Don Burleson

"George Barbour" <gbarbour_at_csc.com> wrote in message news:3cda8a4a_at_pull.gecm.com...
> Beginning to see a 'nasty' trend here. "Experts" sniping at "Experts".

don't know whether you are referring to this thread or the c.d.o.* heirarchy recently but I suspect this might be a misconception. There have been a number of quite informative and technical threads recently in which common knowledge has been rebutted. This is not meant (so far as I read the authors) to bash other authors but to shed light on the facts of how Oracle works. That is some knowledgeable folk here are trying to help the rest of us think deeply about Oracle and , more especially, test and evidence our practices. "Challenge Authority" was IIRC how Jonathan put it. Challenging authority is different in nature and practice from disparaging authority. I think that I have also noticed that folk who give good technical advice here are often the first to put their hands up and acknowledge their mistakes when others point them out. I took the post about the Burleson book in that vein. maybe I was wrong

having said all that the original extract sounds like a description of what the RBO does. (Note I am not commenting on its accuracy here). It doesn't read like a list of recommendations - at least i can't imagine anyone these days publishing a book, which would have gone thru peer review - wth a recommendation to 'always use the index'. However, if it is true, that the RBO will always pick an index if possible it is in he DBA's interest (especially if he works with certain well-known ERP products that mandate the RBO) to know this. FWIW all our instances (even the 7.3.4 one) use CBO.

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK