Re: Standby Server requirements in 10G

"BGT" <bgt0990_at_optonline.net> wrote in
news:1134558878.444147.92030_at_g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Wow, what an ugly response. You have no idea about what our solution
> does and yet you condem it and me, just because it doesn't come from
> Oracle. We have run standby server for multiple customers for the
> last 4 years without missing a logfile, how much more robust does it
> need to be. I don't need to manage 9 standby servers from the same
> box, just one at a time. When Sales and Management come to me and
> say they need to keep the cost down I seriously have to look at the
> price tag. $5K for Standard One or $48K for enterprise. It would be
> irresponsible of me to force that $43K difference on a customer if I
> don't have to. Of course I will always let a customer know that such
> a solution is available and leave the choice to them. Standby server
> is not that difficult to manage why does it have to be costly as
> well? I think your attitude stinks Sybrand, maybe you should take a
> break from this news group, I think you may be burnt out.
>
> Barry
>
>

His responses are usually ugly and insulting. It seems he thinks that anyone who does not do things as he would is incompetent. All it really demonstrates is his narrow mindedness and unwillingness to think outside the box.

I've been using this NG since 1994 and things were much more pleasant back then. If you asked a question you could expect an answer, not a reponse laced with vitriol. But as long as Sybrand is here, you have to expect that.

I would suggest adding him to your killfile. There are plenty of other people here who are more than willing to be helpful with a much more pleasant attitude, and then you don't have to read his irrelevant insults. Received on Wed Dec 14 2005 - 08:48:11 CST