Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Designing database tables for performance?

Re: Designing database tables for performance?

From: jgar the jorrible <joel-garry_at_home.com>
Date: 27 Feb 2007 15:18:11 -0800
Message-ID: <1172618291.675307.139410@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>


On Feb 26, 6:28 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> joel garry wrote:
> > On Feb 24, 5:30 am, "Cimode" <cim..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>On 23 fév, 22:33, "jgar the jorrible" <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>In what RAM would be less physical than HD ? For any reason, an
> >>>>absurdity is an absurdity.
>
> >>>Not an absurdity, you just aren't paying attention to how the I/O is
> >>>counted.
>
> >>So you say there are *ways* to count IO's. Fair enough. Question is:
> >>what has the way of counting IO's has any bearing on the media that
> >>supports them and therefore qualifies their nature as physical or
> >>logical? What is the difference: speed?
>
> >>Physical IO means that IO have some physical inmemory/hd counterpart
> >>while logical IO mean *no media* at all as a prerequisite.
>
> >>>From Oracle's point of view, if the desired data exists in
> >>>Oracle's buffers, that is a logical I/O.
>
> >>As I said, I am well aware of ORACLE brainwashing over its troops.
> >>ORACLE succeded to convince the audience of practictionners that RAM
> >>(call it cache if you want) = logical. One of Larry Ellison
> >>*contribution* to the field of database technology. Reading and
> >>educating yourself in RM will help you see the absurdity in that. (See
> >>rule of indepedence netween logical and physical layer)
>
> >>[Snipped Description of process - thanks for the pedagogic intent
> >>though]
>
> >>>Now, you are welcome to think it is better to be more simple than that
> >>>and just say RAM I/O is the same as HD, but that sounds patently
> >>>absurd to me. Perhaps you have a better way of distinguishing the
> >>>semantics?
>
> >>It sounds absurd because Larry Ellison has brainwashed people like you
> >>(no disrespect meant) *not* to think otherwise to boost up his
> >>products sales and bank account. Read books written by knowledgeable
> >>audiences about RM and you will see what I am refering to.(was in your
> >>shoes once long ago;)) A few good books to read that may help...
>
> >>http://www.dbdebunk.com/books.html
>
> > F'n Pascal? "no disrespect?" HAHAHA
>
> > When were you in my shoes? Do you realize I was awarded "Go Oracle
> > user of the month" for standing up to him 15 years ago (when he was
> > unfairly maligning some poor guy who's management stuck him with some
> > usual product). Kinda scary that some people still remember that,
> > though.
>
> I find your reply ironic. Do you understand the concepts of
> conditioning, positive reinforcement and "shaping" ?

Yeah, I had to go through the basic psychology classes for my undergraduate major. Also, I'm married to a Clinical Psychologist who teaches and supervises post-docs and lets me know about every slight misconception presented in any mass media.

>
> I have known Fabian for about 15 years, and I have yet to see him
> unfairly malign anyone. Although, I have witnessed mob after mob attack him

Well, I have, and I called him on it. Maybe that's why he stopped doing it, if he did stop. Maybe I shared mass hallucinations and it was really someone else.

As for your other post, I can see I didn't make it clear I was surprised at the time to get such an award, and surprised anyone else would remember it years later. I do wish I could find an archive of it (March or April Compuserve, 1992). At the time, I just saw some guy browbeating some other guy who didn't deserve it, I didn't know Pascal from Admiral Hopper (although I probably should have, given that I had been working more than 10 years on R by then - I don't know how you got I felt low status about that!). I'd let it go if people weren't maintaining he never did that.

Which leads to the basic flaws in your arguments: You assume that there is mutual exclusivity between relational theory and usage of admittedly flawed products. You lump me in with "people like...", claim that vendors are disparaging R folk while using terms like "brainwashing," and insinuate everyone who doesn't agree with you is clicker-trained. I suppose now you will complain about

Hey, the only reason I even participated in this thread was someone xposted  to cdos.

"You would not understand why the US either, because your culture does not let you understand. In fact, that is not your fault, but that of your culture. That's essentially true of a vast majority of americans born and raised in the US (note the distinction; there are exceptions, but that's exactly what they are; and you're not one of them)." - Fabian not being elitist? OK, what would you call such patronization? (and again, I do actually agree with him, just not the... whatever you want to call it)

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
"Therefore, don't hasten to be intimidated agree this thread is off.
It is very much to the point. Not addressing the real roots of the
problems is grinding water." - Fabian Pascal
(Fabian quotes from the first hit on google search for fabian pascal
united states education.  I wouldn't dream of making fun of his
English, except that a while back he posted some crapola [well, out-of-
context research attribution] about how good English or the lack
thereof is an indicator of education, on a site that unfortunately no
longer exists.)
Received on Tue Feb 27 2007 - 17:18:11 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US