Data Goob wrote:
> You folks might want to get the online version of this
> magazine:
>
> http://www.eosj.com
>
> They are talking about many of the myths-n-shit you guys are
> propagating. This issue is one you won't want to miss.
It uses a bizzare page reader and does not work very well with Firefox.
But they sure mention IE!!!!
>
>
>
>
> Chris Browne wrote:
>
>>Paul <paulsnewsgroups_at_hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>There is another important reason too: Instrumentation. If they are
>>>>slow diagnosing why is a question of making guesses. That may be a
>>>>reasonable approach when supporting a small non-commercial web site.
>>>>It is a non-starter when talking terabytes and a requirement for 7x24.
>>>>And then there's that little problem with government requirements
>>>>around audits. They just aren't ready for prime-time.
>>>
>>>I have worked for a company (big player in its field) and had an
>>>interview with another (a giant in its field) where they had systems
>>>that ran on all of the major db's - SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and
>>>Sybase.
>>>
>>>These db's contain(ed) neither triggers, SPs, PL/SQL, Transact SQL
>>>or any other proprietary features of any of these db's. The only
>>>coding that varied between the db's was how to get an
>>>autoinc/generator/sequence value and that was in some sort of middle
>>>layer. They did make use of DRI in the db creation scripts.
>>>
>>>I'm not saying that that's a good thing (in fact I'm appalled), but
>>>the fact of the matter is that many companies pay for expensive db's
>>>when in fact they are little more than bitbuckets. I think that it's
>>>only a matter of time before the IT industry is going to wake up to
>>>the reality that (at least as far as *_I_* have seen) very little of
>>>the capacity of an Oracle or DB2 is actually being used and make the
>>>switch to cheaper or Open Source db's.
>>
>>You may want Oracle's instrumentation for terabyte-sized DBs requiring
>>plenty-o-nines' uptime, but there are a whole lot of instances of
>>"departmental" applications out there which are quite amenable to the
>>'leap' to free software databases.
>>
>>For applications that are mostly used during office hours by the
>>limited population of staff within a department, you don't get a lot
>>of value out of the difference in licensing costs between Firebird or
>>PostgreSQL and Oracle.
>>
>>And there are plenty of those sorts of applications around.
>>--
>>(format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "acm.org")
>>http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html
>>Rules of the Evil Overlord #78. "I will not tell my Legions of Terror
>>"And he must be taken alive!" The command will be: ``And try to take
>>him alive if it is reasonably practical.''"
>><http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
>
>
Received on Mon Jun 06 2005 - 17:16:25 CDT
