Howard J. Rogers wrote:
>"Brian Peasland" <dba_at_remove_spam.peasland.com> wrote in message
>news:3FB00DD4.31263750_at_remove_spam.peasland.com...
>
>
>>From the most recent literature on OMF that I've seen from Oracle Corp,
>>OMF wasn't preached as a good idea for production databases, but rather
>>a good idea if you need to quickly and easily set up a simple database
>>for something like testing. This was even discussed in the Oracle
>>Education materials.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Brian
>>
>>
>
>Not quite. It was touted as a "good" way of doing cross-platform development
>(because, not needing to mention paths and filenames, your install script
>wouldn't have its slashes the wrong way around). It was also suggested as a
>good idea for high-end, production, systems with RAID arrays (which would
>include most production systems out there, I'd venture to suggest).
>
>Quote on:
>
>"OMF has the following advantages:
>[snip]
>Makes development of portable third-party tools easier because it eliminates
>the need to put operating system-specific file names in SQL scripts"
>(9i New Features, Volume 2, Page 12-3)
>
>And also:
>
>"Who can use Oracle-Managed Files?
>Databases that are supported by ... A logical volume manager that supports
>striping/RAID and dynamically extensible logical volumes [or] A file system
>that provides large, extensible files"
>(9i New Features, Volume 2, Page 12-5)
>
>And that particular volume is still the current one. And the same sort of
>cobblers crops up throughout the DBA Fundamentals I course, too.
>
>Scary, isn't it?
>
>Regards
>HJR
>
>
I have now modified by curriculum to specifically advise students to
NEVER use this. This
is a horror worthy of a terrorist organization. The problem is that this
bomb was fused by
Oracle itself.
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
Received on Mon Nov 10 2003 - 18:16:46 CST
