Re: Can a procedure contain only a SELECT statement?

From: Bob Jones <email_at_me.not>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:05:14 -0500
Message-ID: <4ba813ca$0$1505$>

>>>> Very simple, choices. That is a major advantage.
>>> I beg to differ. Some do not need the choice, some are only looking for
>>> MS based products, some don't care about the OS...
>> Saying I don't care about OS is like saying I don't care about cost,
>> features, scalability, and so forth. I have no doubt some companies think
>> Windows is the best solution for everything - at least M$ is one of them.
> Not at all. Saying one does not care about the OS can also mean that one
> is willing to pick the OS after the product one wants to use. With
> Windows, Solaris and Linux administrators in house the cost of maintaining
> an additional machine with either OS might be identical.

Isn't that the benefit of having choices?

> But the cost of the application or the choice of applications available
> might differ dramatic. For such a company it is a totally reasonable
> approach to not look at the platforms something can run on in the first
> place but rather on the choice of applications.

Ok, another benefit of having choices.

>>> On the other hand, if you need to support multiple platforms you either
>>> need to make compromises to be able to adjust your product to all of
>>> them - or you need significant more development resources.
>> Why? Oracle has already done that. You talk to the databases the same way
>> across all platforms.
> Do you also administer Oracle the same way on all platforms?

Yes for the most part.

> Does it have the same performance characteristics on all platforms?

No, it may not even on the same platform. Does it need to?

> Do all features work the same way on all platforms?

Yes, Oracle is platform-independent. I can't say the same about SQL server though.

> Is it sufficient to test an application against Oracle on a single
> platform?

Err, I will need a crystal ball to answer that one.

>>> The sheer number of supported OS to choose from is not a value in
>>> itself.
>> Of course, choice has no value. Scalability has no value. Security has no
>> value. Nothing has value.
> I never said that choice or any of the other things you mention has no
> value. Why do I get the impression that you intentionally misquote me?

Ok, let me quote you exactly.

"The sheer number of supported OS to choose from is not a value in itself." Received on Mon Mar 22 2010 - 20:05:14 CDT

Original text of this message