Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: The demise of the Oracle professional?

Re: The demise of the Oracle professional?

From: Nuno Souto <nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 18:50:41 +1000
Message-ID: <3d070cb8$0$28004$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>


In article <1023865801.19767.0.nnrp-01.9e984b29_at_news.demon.co.uk>, you said (and I quote):
>
> I have to disagree with the last point.
> "CPU grunt" only addresses scalability
> in the complete absence of contention.

Yeah, but it "can be applied", can't it? Otherwise the entire model for scalability laboriously built up by IBM is worthless. Oh, hang on a tick...

;-)

>
> To date, I haven't seen many "new tech"
> languages, utilities, paradigms, etc. which
> consider the possibility that they may
> introduce high levels of contention. One of
> the main problems has always been "we've
> got the CPU to waste to make things easier
> for ... (insert "programmer", "user", or other
> preferred sales target).

It's been like that since we moved away from machine code with punched cards. Nirvana for hardware vendors. The theory is: we can always upgrade the hardware and not always the software. Invented by a hardware maker. And let's face it, quite true.

Some of these innovations have actually added tremendous value to the industry. Cobol of course is the longest lived example. It replaced awful Assembler. CICS and the OLTP model was next. They allowed highvolume /low-processing applications to cope with amazing amounts of data and users. Relational databases then allowed us to become free from the "record at a time" paradigm (something the deranged entity beans want to drag us back to...). C was the next one I can think of. Then client/server brought the prohibitively expensive distributed processing within reach of any small shop.

However, all of these have concentrated on REDUCING the amount of development resources needed to get things going.

What I see with J2EE is exactly the opposite: the darn thing needs a cast of thousands to get anywhere. One of the reasons I don't think it will last. Sooner or later someone is gonna do the sums and realize they are spending MORE $$$ now than before. And then it will be off-loaded.

Allow me to use a ratio for a moment. Java/J2EE people to other technology people in my current project: 23-8. Roughly 3-1. Much, much higher than with ANY other language/technology I can recall in all my years in IT. Something is gonna have to give...

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam
Received on Wed Jun 12 2002 - 03:50:41 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US