Re: How to calibrate the CBO

"Ron" <support_at_dbainfopower.com> wrote in message news:wfOdnUlv-4Uq8LDdRVn-tA_at_comcast.com...
>
> 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,
>

Sorry Ron, but if the best you can do on archiving is to give factually incorrect information, and if the best you can do with external tables for an alert log is a "sample" code that won't work and has unnecesasry encumbrances, then you are not really in the best possible position to make a judgement about whether a given book is "one of the best", or whether a particular person has helped "create an industry".

I simply don't believe you "know Oracle from the code base" because your contributions here have been, well, frankly, shoddy. They have the technical competence one usually associates with someone who has been doing Oracle for two or three years, and learning most of what they "know" from Mike and Don's books.

Now I don't know whether that's true or not. But I can judge by looking at the evidence of your posts. I can similarly judge Don Burleson's competence or lack of it by looking at his articles. And they are generally woeful. Not because Don's a bastard or a saint, but because they are *demonstrably*, *technically*, inaccurate.

Playing nice doesn't come into it. Either you can describe something accurately, or you can't. Either your suggestions work, or they don't. Either your advice helps, or it hinders. Now, if when someone points out that a suggested article is *technically* useless, then one should be a big enough man to take it on the chin, learn from the experience, and do better next time. Instead, Burleson doesn't face the music at all, but his good buddy rushes to the resuce, *personally* insulting the poster who had the gumption to point out the howlers. Some "contribution to an industry"!

It's a bit like when I point out to you that your answers on archiving are wrong. "Thank you for expanding my answer" is what you responded. I didn't "expand" on your answer: I corrected it, because it was technically inaccurate and misleading. When others point out your two errors in your "proposed" alert log external table syntax... you didn't admit that column width of 80 and 1000 rejects were just silly mistakes, but claimed "it's just a sample, the user can modify it as he sees appropriate". You can't admit your own mistakes, and that's exactly Don's problem, too.

So yes, I agree that you and Mike and Don should probably trot off to some other place where "good DBAs" of your calibre can amuse yourselves without having to face the awful truth that they don't know an awful lot about what they are supposedly so expert on. You all fit remarkably well together.

HJR

-- 
--------------------------------------------
Oracle Insights: www.dizwell.com
--------------------------------------------