Re: RBO to CBO

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005, damorgan_at_x.washington.edu wrote:
> Sybrand Bakker wrote:

>> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 23:46:54 -0800, DA Morgan
>> <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>Mladen Gogala wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 10:04:44 -0800, DA Morgan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Provided you only use table and index types that existed in Oracle
>>>>>6.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There are many people that only use features of Oracle9 that were
>>>>available with Oracle 7. Many developers don't know about things
>>>>like VARRAY, TABLE & CAST operators to access PL/SQL tables and
>>>>there are even DBAs who have learned about query factoring very
>>>>short time ago. The category of users implied by your comment is not
>>>>very small.
>>>
>>>I think it is unfortunately the vast majority of developers and DBAs.
>>>And when it comes to PL/SQL I rarely see anything that couldn't have
>>>been written in Oracle 7. Cursor loops everywhere and not even a hint
>>>they know what a BULK COLLECT or FORALL is.
>> If you read the information provided by Microsoft on accessing
>> Oracle, they simply don't support anything beyond Oracle 7. This also
>> includes their Oracle Oledb provider. Surely the Oracle driver does
>> support LOBs etc, the Microsoft driver doesn't.  The vast majority of
>> our sites doesn't need an upgrade to 9i, actually they even don't use
>> Oracle 8(i). The two main reasons to upgrade are - changes in
>> database architecture, making Oracle more manageable, at the same
>> time reducing downtime (read: LMTs etc.)  - running a supported
>> database version.  If Oracle wouldn't have such tight desupport
>> police most of our sites wouldn't upgrade at all. Almost all of them
>> still need to be upgraded to 9i.  Happy New Year to everyone!  --
>> Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

How many clients of Oracle can bost the QA systems in place to guarantee an upgrade was successful, therefore being able to pull the trigger and upgrading?

> I had a customer this year still running apps with Oracle 7 and a
> version of forms with a number so small I can't repeat it. Caused them
> nothing but misery when they were forced by Sarbanes-Oxley to audit
> system usage. What would have taken less than two minutes with Oracle
> 9i cost them many tens of thousands of dollars.
>
> No doubt someone in Sri Lanka argued against a tsunami warning system
> as being too expensive. My point being that the price will always be
> paid. It is merely a question of when

Well, the U.S. populace isn't all that worried about terrorism 2 years later, but we sure were on Sept 11th and quite a few months afterward. Its human nature to not worry until the calamity happens, and corporations are ultimately reflective of human nature. But, yes, I do agree with you.

-- 
Galen deForest Boyer
Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.