Re: SQL Server for Oracle DBAs

From: Eric <>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 23:03:47 +0100
Message-ID: <>

On 2008-05-26, Tony Rogerson <> wrote:
>> To get back to the original question, what should we read to get a clear
>> picture of how to set up and use SQL Server, that is written by someone
>> who does not annoy us every third paragraph by demonstrating a serious
>> misunderstanding of relational theory, SQL standards, or even basic
>> computing principles. And further, who is not making the same mistake
>> we discussed above, i.e. to assume that all systems are the same and
>> that some specific experience of theirs is a general principle.
> Look idiot, in response to the orginal OP I said this...
> Whatever you do, don't try and apply Oracle theory and practices against a
> SQL Server install - the two products are very very different and have very
> different strategies for dealing with performance and scalability
> I'm not the one trying to apply the same techniques, strategies, doctrine to
> different products;

Nor am I. I was merely pointing out that the same thing happens in reverse. In fact I did this by repeating your statement (not the one above, but the one you cut out this time) with the names of the products reversed and a couple of grammatical corrections.

> by not agreeing with the statement I made (copied above
> because you appear to be null and void of intelligence) then you obviously
> think that you can apply oracle logic to SQL Server install - which, like I
> stated - you can't.

So you are insulting me on the basis that I agreed with something you said. Was my mistake to not agree with everything you said?

> I note you never commented on my remark about "unbreakable" - speaks
> volumes...

Why should I? I have no reason to comment on any corporation's marketing-speak. And it's not relevant, so why did you put it in if not to divert the thread into an argument you wanted to have?

And you haven't bothered to respond to the other thing I said, i.e. the bit about the original question, which is still at the top of this message.

E. Received on Mon May 26 2008 - 17:03:47 CDT

Original text of this message