Re: metalink still unuseable the 2nd day ...
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:27:05 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 11, 7:51 pm, Noons <wizofo..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 11:26 am, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
> > > problems with it. It'll go away, I'm sure. But did it really need to
> > > be like this?
> > I'm leaning towards "yes, meatlink was so creaky and fungusoid, it
> > did." And yes, I'm one of the loudest squawkers about it. But this
> > too will pass, just like the Sidekick fiasco, and Audi sudden
> > acceleration, and hacking of Apple keyboards. Oh wait, that last one
> > just started.
> We disagree here. I didn't have the slightest problem with old
> It did its job quite well, metaphorical adjectives apart.
I'm not so sure we disagree, I just didn't make it clear what I was talking about. I was referring to the metalink backend, making the assumption there are a bunch of old stovepipe systems hacked together, to the point it was falling apart. But of course, I really don't know, that's just the impression I've gotten looking at what appeared to be cracks in the system and the real strangeness of the way calls get passed around as of late. Judging just from the front end, it did appear to do its job well, if you didn't look too close, like how odd the searching would be and of course the lousy content control.
> Of course: it didn't support OCM. But hey: I never asked for OCM
> neither did a lot of users. It's an imposition from Oracle: not
> not asked for. To cause this mayhem and bad blood with clients for
> single reason of updating something that works so that something else
> one asked for could be supported, is sheer madness.
> Dunno about you, but after spending weeks disabling half the
> information about my systems that OCM wanted to collect and settling
> finally on a "disconnected" setup, I really don't see much value in
> what it does that wasn't already addressed with SR templates.
> And no: there is NO WAY anyone from Oracle Support will EVER convince
> me they need to know the IP AND the MAC address of every network
> interface in my servers in order to "collect information" about my
> databases. That one is bordering on lunacy and just about breaks
> every mantra of basic system security! Yes, it collects and sends MAC
> addresses - by default!!!
Actually, I whined about OCM some on the oracle forums, specifically about how it kept trying to contact Oracle when I had been very careful not to ever agree to such a thing
-- _at_home.com is bogus. http://www.snorgtees.com/index.phpReceived on Thu Nov 12 2009 - 11:27:05 CST