Re: Database won't mount, but no errors reported ???

On Sat, 18 Jan 2003 18:52:29 -0000, "Paul Brewer" <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk> wrote:

>Just my 2c:
>
>Windoze isn't so bad. It just gets *used* badly.
>
>IMHO, it's pretty stable for small/medium size installations (from NT351,
>NT4, W2K through XP Pro), **provided it is administered correctly**. Many
>years ago I ran an important accounting system on Oracle 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 for
>a medium-sized Lloyd's insurance broker on NT4 in the City of London for
>months, without the need to reboot.
>
>A decent Unix is better and more scalable, but of course you pay more.
>
>The biggest problem, I think, is that because Windoze *looks* easy,
>companies think they can employ the same amateur idiot like they did for
>their departmental desktops and Access databases, and expect the corporate
>level of resilience and availability.
>

HOW TRUE
>And of course, we had the fools who would try to do file and print serving
>and all the other stuff on an NT box, in addition to database serving.

You forget using the database server as PDC or BDC

>
>In short, if we had the same degree of professionalism and competence with
>our NT Admin as we have in our Unix Admin, the difference would be much
>narrower.
>

AMEN to that !!!

>Flame away!
>
>Regards,
>Paul

Regards

Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address Received on Sat Jan 18 2003 - 14:14:59 CST