Agreed, good points. As a colleague of mine once said "performance is part
of the job" (meaning you don't bolt it on later.)
Jin
"Sybrand Bakker" <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:5kr1ru4k5q2h9fd34md791393snisnrica_at_4ax.com...
> On 18 Oct 2002 22:07:07 -0500, Galen Boyer <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com>
> wrote:
>
> >But, porting is certainly a reasonable first step in reengineering?
>
> Both have to be done primarily by humans.
> It is a well-known fact that humans can be lazy. Chances are the
> porting is done, and the re-engineering is postponed until a
> subsequent release, especially as developers unfamiliar with Oracle
> won't even notice they are selling a crap application off.
> One of my customers have sold such an application and is using it.
> The vendor is very unwilling to make any chances, as it seems to need
> to run on multiple platforms. Is it ever going to work? One of the
> largest tables is subjected to 4 statements which all have a full
> table scan by design. Whatever optimizer you are going to use, it will
> choose that dratted fts. The vendor seems to refuse to change those
> statements. In the mean-time the customer wants to run 10 times as
> much business as he is doing now using this un-scalable application
> (it also doesn't use bind-variables). We have been throwing iron at
> this problem for many months now, and we have seen the app crashing at
> least once a week. The customers existence is at stake now.
> Simply because the vendor 'ported' the application, and didn't
> reengineer it.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
>
> To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address
Received on Sat Oct 19 2002 - 01:07:20 CDT
