Re: Suggestions for first exam ...

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:bl6hod$dq0$1$8300dec7_at_news.demon.co.uk...

> Years ago, when you were young and naive you
> probably believed the documentation - you don't
> now, so why assume that your belief was sound then ?

Hey, if we can't quote tahiti what can we quote then? :)

> Thye change from v5 to v6 was documented,
> but that didn't stop the stories.

IIRC, v7 is when the compression of indexes by default disappeared? V6 still had "forward compression" always on (whatever that meant).

> The trouble is that it takes a lot of time to work out what's
> there, and what isnt fluff - and your fluff is my crtiical need -
> and anyway, 10.1.0.2 will have some useful stuff that won't
> be in 10.1.0.1, and so on . . . (that's rhetorical, by the way,
> not based on known fact).

Sure. But there are things that are too useful to mask behind the "ASSM is God" or "RAC is everything" mantra. I'd say in general anything that removes a limitation or pushes it further is worth writing about in a diffs document. There are just too many limits in PL/SQL that have been removed in 10g to go undocumented, IMHO.
> badly described that you could barely spot the benefit. It's
> the result of using your best technical people to do technical
> things, and not wasting them on writing.

Too true. But do you think they'd ask third parties to help? Noooooo....

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam