Re: How to calibrate the CBO

Hello Richard,

   I am not talking about technical stuff here. Everyone can and will have a mistakes.

   My point is about playing nice, being a "mench"

   Mike and Don both take a huge participation in creating oracle database industry as we know it today.

   Their books are one of the best (Don's statspack book for example a unique gem, IMHO).

   Why publicly attack people who contributed so much?

   I personally DBA with over 15 years of experience, know Oracle from the code base.

   Being couple days in this newsgroup and trying to help I was attacked as well, just for trying to share free program with the colleagues.

   I am getting close to Mike opinion that good DBAs does not belong here (until all of us would play nice).

Regards,

  Ron
  DBA Infopower
  http://www.dbainfopower.com
  Standard disclaimer:
http://www.dbainfopower.com/dbaip_advice_disclaimer.html

"Richard Foote" <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com> wrote in message news:KW2Xb.54425$Wa.14585_at_news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Ron" <support_at_dbainfopower.com> wrote in message
> news:lPSdna1wRqNqk7Hd4p2dnA_at_comcast.com...
> >
> > Hello Mike,
> >
> > Absolutely agree with you. Unfortunately some individuals dominate
and
> > saturate this newsgroup with personal agendas, vendettas and Prejudices.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
>
> Hi Ron
>
> As the poster who originally highlighted DB's article as offering "some
good
> recommendations", you probably feel a little silly and somewhat
embarrassed.
> However this attempt to deflect attention away from the article and
somehow
> discredit the "messenger" who gave it the technical analysis it deserved
> comes across as rather limp and feeble.
>
> How about you do yourself and this newsgroup a favour and turn this whole
> silly discussion around and focus on the "technical" aspects of this
> article. Ron, I offer you a little challenge that may help you to save
some
> face and show your technical worth to Oracle Land out there. Why don't you
> respond to my technical analysis and highlight exactly why I'm wrong with
my
> summation that the article is tripe. Please go through each of my points
and
> simply explain to me where I'm wrong with each point and why you think the
> article has "some good recommendations".
>
> You obviously think I have "personal agendas, vendettas and prejudices"
and
> that my assessment of the article is wrong and unfair. Well Ron, prove it
!!
>
> Oh, and to be consistent, please reference the *original* version of the
> article, not the version that was hurriedly re-written the day after I
> posted my original response to *your* recommendation. It's still tripe but
> at least it has now addressed some of the inaccuracies that *I*
highlighted.
>
> Because it you can't prove me wrong, if you can't offer valid *technical*
> arguments to support your claims, then one can only suggest you agree with
> my assessment and that I'm afraid it is you dear Ron that appears to have
> "personal agendas, vendettas and prejudices".
>
> I look forward to your response, although I won't be holding my breath ...
>
> Richard
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 13 2004 - 18:43:33 CST