Re: Where is Oracle’s Grid ?

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 07:31:35 -0800
Message-ID: <1071847804.695870@yasure>

Noons wrote:

> Or they may just not agree with that direction. Let's see:
> 3rd party apps out there have serious performance problems.
> Mostly caused by moronic design, incredibly badly written SQL
> and generally inneficient coding. In what way is all this V$jazz
> gonna help in fixing that?

The seem to be blaming the wrong party. Oracle has provided the tools to the 3rd party vendors. Do you expect Larry to send over a couple of heavies to force them to use the tools properly?

"You write bad code and the dog gets it!"

The onus is on your (well not you personally but you the consumer) to stop buying garbage. And if you can't find something good to purchase then you should hire someone like me to build it for you (not spamming just a turn of a phrase) or build it yourself. I've evaluated Siebel, for example, on several occassions and on one had it purchased by a firm over my objections. My solution was to refuse to work with them anymore. I can't understand how anyone could think their products are worth more than $1.95.

  >>Let me guess: Siebel? SAP? PeopleSoft?
>
> All of them.

<colorful comments and gestures made here>

>>Consider that document called a resume'. It may take awhile for the
>>right opportunity but I'd be looking for the door.

>
> Well, so are the vast majority of Oracle production DBAs in shops
> with any 3rd party apps. The job is basically dead and Oracle is
> the one who killed it.

I still fail to see why it is Oracle's fault that people used their tool set to build junk? Or perhaps more sharply ... why it is Oracle's fault that your organization didn't properly test the product before laying out such huge sums of money.

Do you blame someone in Japan when you purhase a used Toyota and it doesn't run well? I hope the answer is no. You take a used car to a mechanic and have it checked out. If it is a lemon you don't buy it. Why doesn't that apply to software too?

>>I'm with you on many of the 3rd party suppliers. But why, exactly, is
>>their refusal to follow advice given numerous times by Tom Kyte,
>>Jonathan Lewis, Richard Foote, etc., etc. etc. Oracle's rsponsibility.

>
> They CANNOT follow the advice! That IS the whole point!
> They do NOT have the source code to play with, they CANNOT
> change a single line of any production setup without incurring
> the "lost warranty" rubbish, they don't get the slightest
> support from Oracle if they dare go against the 3rd party maker.

I'd buy your argument if it was impossible for anyone to build a third-party application using the Oracle database but it isn't. And I know for a fact there are a huge number of extremely successful projects built with the same starting tools used by Siebel, SAP, and PeopleSoft.

Just to name one look at Amazon.com. They have built one of the world's top database implementations using the very same CDs supplied by Oracle. They too didn't have the source code to tweak. So if they could do it correctly ... and so have many others ... why is it Oracle's fault that the big three app vendors wouldn't know referential integrity if it climbed out from under their bed every morning?

>>And before you answer let me ask a question.
>>
>>When you buy a car do you expect driving lessons?

>
> Of course not. When I buy Oracle, I don't expect them
> to come over and run things for me. But that's what they
> want to do now.

In what way?

>>When you buy a steak do you expect the check-out clerk to come home and
>>cook it for you?

>
> Of course not. But Oracle wouldn't mind keeping the steak
> in-house...

But doesn't.

>>Then why do you expect Oracle to teach you, or the 3rd party app
>>vendors, how to properly use their product?

>
> I don't expect them to teach me anything! Most DBAs out there
> don't NEED instruction on how to run the product. Like anyone
> else, they are perfectly capable of deriving it from a manual,
> or a book, or a white paper.

Agreed. But I thought that was your complaint. That somehow it was Oracle's responsibility that 3rd party app vendors didn't use the tool properly.

> What they cannot do is go against a 3rd party vendor without
> Oracle's support. And that support has over the last 5
> years not been there at all. Since Oracle decided to get into
> the service bureau market.

I'm lost with the above comment.

> Remains to be seen how many production DBAs will STILL recommend
> Oracle when the next upgrade cycle comes through. From their point
> of view, they do NOT want Oracle there anymore. Then we'll see how
> much $$$ Oracle really will make off this idea: in the long run.

That may be the flavour in Oz but certainly not here. Here you will more likely find DBAs having little or no influence over the database that is purchased. They are implementers not decision makers. And from the numbers I am seeing Oracle is actually increasing not decreasing its market presence.

> Any idiot can claim excellent policies at any given point in time.
> How well those policies survive the test of time is what defines
> IMHO the truly competent strategist.

Is it the policies survival ... or the ability to change those policies in accordance with business conditions that matters most? Survival usually goes to the niblest.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Fri Dec 19 2003 - 09:31:35 CST