Re: How do I set ORACLE_SID in windows NT environment

fitzjarrell_at_cox.net wrote:
>
> Indicating, to me and others, that he/she has created a database
which
> is completely useless to the client. Why one would do this is beyond
> me, when it is known from the beginning that database 'xyz' is to be
> used. He now has an 'orcl' database occupying space unnecessarily.
> This shows his lack of knowledge and/or control of the installer.
Such
> acts would not bolster my confidence in his abilities.

Attempting to look at this from the point of view of someone familiar with unix but only, uh, "familiarized" with Windows, I think a more benign interpretation can be made, viz., it is more trivial to remove an unnecessary instance from unix than windows. So one could reasonably conclude an installation has gone well if a working database results.

I think most of us agree that is not the best practice, but I don't see it necessarily leading to a conclusion of incompetence - at worst, inexperience. I would have agreed that it could lead to such a conclusion in the past, but remember, one of the goals of 10g is to make it actually able to clean up after itself with delete database.

>
> > I am done with this thread. My final thought, which I saw recently
> in
> > another thread by someone else, is to consider the tone and manner
in
> > which contributors such as Tom Kyte or Jonathan Lewis approach this
> > newsgroup.
> >
> > Perhaps you and HJR are already at this same level as those people.
> > More power to you guys if that's the case.
> >
> > Neither of those guys, to my knowledge, ever asks why people are
> asking
> > questions or alleges that the person asking the question may be not
> be
> > up to the challenge. They just answer the question ... that's it.
> >
>
> They most certainly do. Jonathan usually doesn't reply to a thread
> until it's fairly well developed, and the why's and wherefore's have
> been sorted out. Tom Kyte DOES ask why, because blindly answering a
> question can sometimes be disastrous.

And both those guys are not afraid to point out bollocks when they see it. They just reserve the pointing for times when it is quite useful.

>
> > I used the word insult in my earlier post. I apologize if that was
> not
> > your intention. It is way too easy to type into a computer and
have
> > your fingers come up with words you would not use in a face to face
> > conversation.
> >
>
> Apology accepted.
>
> > My opinion only -- pointing out problems and correcting the advice
> that
> > people give in response to questions posted on this newsgroup is
way
> > different from speculations about the posters asking questions.
>
> No 'speculations' were made by me; my response was issued based upon
> the text of the original post and what it clearly, in my mind, said
> about the OP and his skills. Again, it wasn't rude, and there was no
> intent or desire to call the OP 'un-professional'; it was honest.
The
> only intent was to inform the OP he was likely out of his league with
> this assignment/client. And I stand by that assessment.

I think you overgeneralized from insufficient data. Of course, I think anyone who uses or encourages csh in a production environment is... well, I suffer from bruxism every time I see one of Tom's csh scripts :-)

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
"...that was 'Pepper,' by the band that made it OK to say the word
'butthole' on FM radio..." - heard on radio.