Re: metalink still unuseable the 2nd day ...
From: joel garry <joel-garry_at_home.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:12:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <67d4d739-dc5f-4b83-82f1-3af38a0f8e01_at_d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
On Nov 12, 11:42Â am, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 7:57Â am, Steve Howard <stevedhow..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 7:48Â am, MBPP <mpacheco_bra..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 11, 4:05Â pm, Noons <wizofo..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 12, 1:38Â am, MBPP <mpacheco_bra..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > IE also worked fine (version 8). I also noted they call the SWF
> > > > > directly without a "wrapper" to check Flash version, etc. My Flash
> > > > > version here is 10.0.32, try to upgrade if you have version 9, maybe
> > > > > it can help? I read somewhere that they demand 9.0.115 or greater I
> > > > > think.
>
> > > > Oh great! Â So now, besides having to figure out all the db versions
> > > > and patches to make things work, we also are supposed to track the
> > > > "consistency" of browser version and flash version?
>
> > > > Welcome to the brave new world of dba2.0: spend all your time trying
> > > > to get the "easy, time-saving UI" to work!
>
> > > > I'm on 10.0.32 Flash and latest FF and still having minor nagging
> > > > problems with it. Â It'll go away, I'm sure. Â But did it really need to
> > > > be like this?
>
> > > Of course not, I too think the new interface could be simpler and
> > > faster. Disclaimer, I don't work for Oracle but I work with Oracle
> > > databases as a DBA and developer for +14 years. Note, the idea behind
> > > RIA interfaces is to make the applications more interactive and faster
> > > to navigate since you don't (re)load pages for every navigation and
> > > you don't need to mimic visual effects using tons of CSS/Javascript.
> > > The visual "appealing" in my opinion is a secondary consideration that
> > > must be touched only after the application meets all its functional
> > > requirements. For the past 2 years I am working with Adobe Flex
> > > (Flash) creating RIA applications for customers that use Oracle as
> > > database. Our architecture on the Oracle side is based on PL/SQL
> > > stored procedures that dynamically generate XML via EPG or MOD_PLSQL.
> > > This is in fact the same method that the old Metalink was using but
> > > generating dynamic HTML. But now it seems they are using a Java middle
> > > tier so most likely they recoded big portions of it. In my opinion if
> > > they would have continued to use MOD_PLSQL they would just need to
> > > adapt the output to XML (via a parameter) and things would be much
> > > simpler and faster. They would be able to run both versions in
> > > parallel without the need to migrate any data. Once users are happy
> > > and it is stable you turn the old off. On the interface side they
> > > could just keep more or less the same general interface as the old
> > > Metalink in version 1 and enhance it visually in the next versions.
> > > Apparently they did too much in one shot and the results are here for
> > > everyone to see. This is something I saw many times in the past, the
> > > development/management team is induced with "hype" technologies and
> > > make things much more complex than they should be.
>
> > I don't know about the most of the people on this board, but I use
> > Metalink almost exclusively for searching issues I am currently
> > encountering. Â Fix that first, as it is absolutely awful, even if it
> > didn't come from a database company. Â I mean atrocious.
>
> > I was on a call with a support analyst from Oracle yesterday (an
> > absolutely fantastic one, BTW), and he said he had just googled
> > something for an answer. Â That's all I needed to hear. Â Download
> > Google's home search page and see how many bytes it is.
>
> Someone else mentioned that (funnily enough, after I had posted in
> another thread how I'd given up on forum search and gave an example to
> someone on how to use google to do it, and the someone else thanked me
> for that), but I disagree:http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=3892731�
>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:12:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <67d4d739-dc5f-4b83-82f1-3af38a0f8e01_at_d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
On Nov 12, 11:42Â am, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 7:57Â am, Steve Howard <stevedhow..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 7:48Â am, MBPP <mpacheco_bra..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 11, 4:05Â pm, Noons <wizofo..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 12, 1:38Â am, MBPP <mpacheco_bra..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > IE also worked fine (version 8). I also noted they call the SWF
> > > > > directly without a "wrapper" to check Flash version, etc. My Flash
> > > > > version here is 10.0.32, try to upgrade if you have version 9, maybe
> > > > > it can help? I read somewhere that they demand 9.0.115 or greater I
> > > > > think.
>
> > > > Oh great! Â So now, besides having to figure out all the db versions
> > > > and patches to make things work, we also are supposed to track the
> > > > "consistency" of browser version and flash version?
>
> > > > Welcome to the brave new world of dba2.0: spend all your time trying
> > > > to get the "easy, time-saving UI" to work!
>
> > > > I'm on 10.0.32 Flash and latest FF and still having minor nagging
> > > > problems with it. Â It'll go away, I'm sure. Â But did it really need to
> > > > be like this?
>
> > > Of course not, I too think the new interface could be simpler and
> > > faster. Disclaimer, I don't work for Oracle but I work with Oracle
> > > databases as a DBA and developer for +14 years. Note, the idea behind
> > > RIA interfaces is to make the applications more interactive and faster
> > > to navigate since you don't (re)load pages for every navigation and
> > > you don't need to mimic visual effects using tons of CSS/Javascript.
> > > The visual "appealing" in my opinion is a secondary consideration that
> > > must be touched only after the application meets all its functional
> > > requirements. For the past 2 years I am working with Adobe Flex
> > > (Flash) creating RIA applications for customers that use Oracle as
> > > database. Our architecture on the Oracle side is based on PL/SQL
> > > stored procedures that dynamically generate XML via EPG or MOD_PLSQL.
> > > This is in fact the same method that the old Metalink was using but
> > > generating dynamic HTML. But now it seems they are using a Java middle
> > > tier so most likely they recoded big portions of it. In my opinion if
> > > they would have continued to use MOD_PLSQL they would just need to
> > > adapt the output to XML (via a parameter) and things would be much
> > > simpler and faster. They would be able to run both versions in
> > > parallel without the need to migrate any data. Once users are happy
> > > and it is stable you turn the old off. On the interface side they
> > > could just keep more or less the same general interface as the old
> > > Metalink in version 1 and enhance it visually in the next versions.
> > > Apparently they did too much in one shot and the results are here for
> > > everyone to see. This is something I saw many times in the past, the
> > > development/management team is induced with "hype" technologies and
> > > make things much more complex than they should be.
>
> > I don't know about the most of the people on this board, but I use
> > Metalink almost exclusively for searching issues I am currently
> > encountering. Â Fix that first, as it is absolutely awful, even if it
> > didn't come from a database company. Â I mean atrocious.
>
> > I was on a call with a support analyst from Oracle yesterday (an
> > absolutely fantastic one, BTW), and he said he had just googled
> > something for an answer. Â That's all I needed to hear. Â Download
> > Google's home search page and see how many bytes it is.
>
> Someone else mentioned that (funnily enough, after I had posted in
> another thread how I'd given up on forum search and gave an example to
> someone on how to use google to do it, and the someone else thanked me
> for that), but I disagree:http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=3892731�
>
Not sure why google screwed up link (ampersand followed by hash
mark?) but I'll try again:
http://forums.oracle.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=3892731�
The title is "My Oracle Support Should Borrow Simplicity from Google
Home Page "
jg
-- _at_home.com is bogus. &#wtf?Received on Thu Nov 12 2009 - 17:12:28 CST