Re: Oracle questions

Van,
It sounds like someone has made the goal to handle all TAR's quickly. I read a book on Deming and found it quite interesting when someone asked him how to improve the quality of their customer service when they had to do X per hour. His reply was that you either did quality customer service or you did X per hour. You cannot have both as constraints. (True, you can have quality service and happen to do X per hour, but that is an accident and not an essential property of the situation.) Too bad. Probably someone higher up has made a requirement that sounds good, but gets translated into the behavior you indicate below.

I was talking to someone who worked on an old mainframe by XYZ company. The requirement came down that the machine had to be able to handle 30 simultaneous users and that whether there was 1 user or 30 a particular benchmark had to be the same. That sounds great. I mean it is a great selling point! "Customer, this machine is so powerful that whether you have 1 or 30 users on the machine at a time the system response is the same." Of course, the engineers who implemented it did it by checking how many users were on the system and inserting NOPs when less than 30 were on the system. They met the requirement. They did what they were told.

Too bad. I like Oracle products.
Jim

"Van Messner" <vmessner_at_bestweb.net> wrote in message news:Uj_Q5.1232$Ur5.120375_at_monger.newsread.com...
> Over the past six months or so the quality of Oracle support has trended
> down. Part of this seems to be due to their pushing everything out to
> Metalink, without ramping up the Metalink staff. And possibly some is by
> design. For example if you file a TAR over the net and an analyst gives
 you
> an answer, he can mark the issue closed. If his answer is wrong or
> incomplete you have to start a whole new TAR. Oracle has not cut the
 price
> of support during this period, just its quality.
>
> Van
>
>
> <ashish25_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message
 news:8v11f2$hhm$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> > Hi David,
> > I am not an access developer but an Oracle DBA with around 5 years
> > of experience.Nowdays I am noticing the quality of support has really
> > gone bad.Oracle support wasn't able to pinpoint any resolution to
> > around any problems I encountered in last 5 months or so.First my
> > platform was HP 10.2 with Oracle 8.0.5 and now LINUX with Oracle 8i.Are
> > you feeling the same way??
> > I find Deja to be much better at problem resolution with
> > you,Howard,Jonathan,Steve,Sybrand in the lead.I really respect you guys
> > for taking so much pains.
> > Thanks,
> > Ashish
> > In article <8v10tt$h4g$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > David Fitzjarrell <oratune_at_aol.com> wrote:
> > > In our last gripping episode "Mystery" <u> wrote:
> > > > Ok
> > > >
> > > > If Oracle is so great why?
> > > >
> > > > Is it so expensive
> > > > Is it not SQL92
> > > > Does the ridiculous documentation come in useless HTML format
> > > > Are the manuals so bad
> > > > Are the tools so bad they crash on every platform (not a good sign
 for a
> > > > software product)
> > > > Is it just so dam arrogant?
> > > >
> > > > Answers on a post card to Mr Big Salary, Oracle House.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Apparently an Access developer...
> > >
> > > --
> > > David Fitzjarrell
> > > Oracle Certified DBA
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
>
>
Received on Sat Nov 18 2000 - 23:18:55 CST