Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: MS SQL Server Evaluation

Re: MS SQL Server Evaluation

From: Howard J. Rogers <>
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 12:08:52 +1100
Message-ID: <4053b0ad$0$8357$>

"Daniel Morgan" <> wrote in message news:1079218933.553992_at_yasure...
> Howard J. Rogers wrote:
> > Were you aware that Larry pulled the entire RAC course material about 4
> > weeks before it was due to be delivered... because it kept saying things
> > like "RAC is an enhancement to... a development of... OPS". Larry pulled
> > because he wanted RAC pushed as a brand new product with no forebears,
> > is what the revised notes went on to do.
> I am aware of this.
> > Sounds like you bought the company line, sorry to say.
> Unless the developers, themselves, are lying after being plyed with a
> substantial quantity of mind-altering liquid I'm inclined to believe
> them.
> > Unless you can show me the source code for OPS and the source code for
> > then weird hints that "I have good reasons for stating something" don't
> > actually get us anywhere. Particularly when I can equally mysteriously
> > that I have extremely excellent reasons for stating that I know RAC is a
> > development of OPS.
> >
> > HJR
> We both know I don't have the source code and that anyone that has it
> and does so is toast. So I expect we'll have to let this one end where
> it is.

Well, let me just ask you this then. Given that OPS first made an (admittedly rather faltering) appearance in Oracle 6, and that there was therefore the best part of 10 years' development effort to get OPS to where it was in 8.1.7, do you honestly believe that they trashed the entire lot and started with an utterly clean slate in order to get RAC out of the door?

Particularly when you might care to bear in mind that cache fusion actually made an appearance in 8.1.7 regarding consistent read buffer transfers.

But as a mere humble trainer, it was nevertheless strictly verboten to discuss RAC as a developement to OPS. I imagine the particular developers you plied with mind-altering liquids were under similar injunctions from the top.

I realise it won't be worth anything to you, but I'll give you a categorical assurance that the codebase for RAC is the same as the one for OPS, with enhancements of course.

HJR Received on Sat Mar 13 2004 - 19:08:52 CST

Original text of this message