> Then you're an even bigger idiot than I gave you credit for, because
...<blah><blah>,<blah>
After your ugly speech is done here are the results:
You provided bad technical advice
Being provided with 100% clear technical evidence you answered with
curses
Not being able to come with anything else, you imply that others support
you.
When you was helping to crucify Don Burleson on this forum you cared
only for technical correctness, and ignore that many DBAs would take a word
from Burleson vs all your life story and all technical advice you can
provide in a future 10 lifes.
So much for Howard J. Rogers
Ron
DBA Infopower
http://www.dbainfopower.com
Standard disclaimer:
http://www.dbainfopower.com/dbaip_advice_disclaimer.html
"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
news:14a1f766.0402240446.30d28072_at_posting.google.com...
> "Ron" <support_at_dbainfopower.com> wrote in message
news:<So2dnf4YbtlCNafd4p2dnA_at_comcast.com>...
> > > It's about whether *your* method
> > >was applicable to the original poster, and whether my not mentioning
> > >it was "reckless". The fact remains, unfortunately (for you) perhaps,
> > >that the original poster got his database back without using your
> > >'method',
> >
> > Hello Howard,
> >
> > Fact #1:
> > Database in question is a REAL PRODUCTION database,
>
> No that's not a fact. That's a complete invention on your part, as is
> evidenced by the original posters own contribution here.
>
> > just went uder
> > unsceduled outage and was RECREATED (according to user's original and
later
> > messages).
>
>
> No, by the original poster's own admission, he didn't REcreate
> anything. He used DBCA to create a brand new, totally empty database.
> So that's not a fact either.
>
>
> > Fact #2:
> >
> > Your advice required user to dispose new PRODUCTION database and
recover
> > old database.
>
> No, my advice was that he dispose of the new database he'd created on
> the off-chance it might be useful, since he wouldn't need it to
> actually recover. (NB: oddly enough, the OP disposed of his new
> database and was able to recover without it. Er, just as I suggested
> he would).
>
> > Your advice requires DOWNTIME.
>
> His production database was already down. It required no more downtime
> than he was already suffering.
>
> >
> > Fact #3
> >
> > My advice was to to recover necessary data OUTSIDE of PRODUCTION
database
> > and bring in in using transportable tablepsaces.
>
> No, your advice was to perform a completely unnecessary TSPITR.
>
> > My advice DOES NOT requires DOWNTIME.
>
> Your advice requires that having recovered what was his production
> database, he actually endure *more* downtime whilst he goes through
> the rigmarole of transporting the data OUT of his production database
> and into a database which otherwise has nothing in it.
>
> > User would be 100% succesful usign TSPIRT (you recognized this as
well)
>
> No, I recognise only that TSPITR, which you still can't get the
> abbreviation right for, was completely and utterly unnecessary. Oh,
> and so does the original poster, by the way.
>
> > and he also would keep user experince at a much higher level.
>
> He didn't have any users, so dancing on a lampost with a ukele would
> have achieved a much higher level of user experience too. Whatever it
> might mean.
>
> > I beleive you assumed that user's database can be manipulated at will
and
> > this is why you advice him to do so.
>
> No, you can't read English, and your English skills are pretty poor so
> that's not entirely surprising, and you therefore have no idea or
> understanding how it is that I managed to work out what was actually
> going on.
>
> > And on that basis, I also think this thread should end.
>
> Then you're an even bigger idiot than I gave you credit for, because I
> gave you every opportunity to back up a bit, acknowledge a modicum of
> common ground and accept only the slimmest of face-saving politeness.
> And you couldn't even do that.
>
> Everyone in this newsgroup, Ron... and I mean *every*one, knows that
> what you are prattling on about is utter tosh. And I include Norman in
> that, and I am sure he will jump on me and this thread if I've
> mis-understood him.
>
> And here's the thing: if you can't even be half-decent in this thread,
> then it is abundantly clear that you have *nothing* to offer in any
> other threads. Even if you happen to strike it technically accurate,
> it is painfully apparent it will be by pure chance. That's not good
> for you, for your company, or for the unfortunate schmucks who happen
> to be in receipt of your advice.
>
> And yes, I know full well that you will plead "Mr Howard is being
> unkind to me". Try and understand, though: it's not just me. Every
> even vaguely regular on this newsgroup thinks of you with utter
> disdain.
>
>
>
>
> > Ron
> > DBA Infopower
> > http://www.dbainfopower.com
> > Standard disclaimer:
> > http://www.dbainfopower.com/dbaip_advice_disclaimer.html
Received on Tue Feb 24 2004 - 10:34:38 CST
