Re: Oracle sucks!
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 01:33:34 GMT
Message-ID: <Of0qa.611260$F1.81767_at_sccrnsc04>
Henry Lafleur wrote:
> Tim Ashman <tim_mapson_at_ashmans.net> wrote in message
> news:<vN0pa.294379$OV.337426_at_rwcrnsc54>...
>> Bob Loblaw wrote: >> >> > Why does Oracle suck so much? >>
...
>> >> But seriously why do you think it sucks?
>
> Man, Oracle has some serious problems with their GUI tools. If you go
> to install the Oracle client from the GUI and hit the back button, it
> will create multiple homes in the registry. The pseudo-wizard is
> making changes as you hit Next, Next, but won't undo the changes when
> you hit Back. The Microsoft OLEDB Provider for Oracle won't work with
> multiple homes, so that screws you if you use that. If you use the
> Oracle OLEDB provider, it will cause IIS to crash randomly.
>
I don't have any exprience with this. I have installed oracle on linux with the gui tools and had a little problem with the memory installed but that was it. Once I had enough memory the install went smooth. I will admit it was a simple 8.1.7 install
> The global database name, instead of being stored in one location is
> stored in about 10 locations, so to change the domain name for a
> database you have to jump through hoops. Can you say normalization of
> data! Is this a database company or what?
Having never done this either I can see how that would be a major pain.
>
> Microsoft? How about right click, New Database--You've got a new
> database that will tune itself. Oracle? An act of Congress. I had a
> DBA send me a script to create a new Oracle database instance. I tried
> to run it, and it not only did not create an instance, it screwed up
> the other instance. Then you have to tune every table yourself. Who
> has the time for this kind of stuff? Even with PostgreSQL, you just
> type CREATE DATABASE (or something like that) and you're there. Not
> that I like Microsoft or anything, but they seem to be more sane that
> Oracle.
>
> I could go on and on and on and on...
>
> So what if Oracle is fast. I don't need it. SQL Server is fast also.
> Our customers demand Oracle because their DBAs have them by the
> nads--so we are forced to use it, and without a DBA.
>
> Henry.
It does appear that oracle is harder to admin but then again I've had my two oracle instances running for over 5 years and never had a lick of trouble. I think in the end that is also important.
Tim Received on Fri Apr 25 2003 - 03:33:34 CEST