Re: metalink still unuseable the 2nd day ...
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:50:14 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <hdh3qm$ne3$3_at_solani.org>
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:51:01 -0800, Noons wrote:
> On Nov 12, 11:26 am, joel garry <joel-ga..._at_home.com> wrote:
>
>> > problems with it. It'll go away, I'm sure. But did it really need >> > to be like this? >> >> I'm leaning towards "yes, meatlink was so creaky and fungusoid, it >> did." And yes, I'm one of the loudest squawkers about it. But this >> too will pass, just like the Sidekick fiasco, and Audi sudden >> acceleration, and hacking of Apple keyboards. Oh wait, that last one >> just started.
>
>
> We disagree here. I didn't have the slightest problem with old
> Metalink.
> It did its job quite well, metaphorical adjectives apart.
>
> Of course: it didn't support OCM. But hey: I never asked for OCM
> anyway,
> neither did a lot of users. It's an imposition from Oracle: not needed,
> not asked for. To cause this mayhem and bad blood with clients for the
> single reason of updating something that works so that something else no
> one asked for could be supported, is sheer madness.
>
> Dunno about you, but after spending weeks disabling half the information
> about my systems that OCM wanted to collect and settling finally on a
> "disconnected" setup, I really don't see much value in what it does that
> wasn't already addressed with SR templates.
>
> And no: there is NO WAY anyone from Oracle Support will EVER convince me
> they need to know the IP AND the MAC address of every network interface
> in my servers in order to "collect information" about my databases.
> That one is bordering on lunacy and just about breaks every mantra of
> basic system security! Yes, it collects and sends MAC addresses - by
> default!!!
>
>> The oracle-l thread about quotes from support people on the phone >> trying to access MOS/metalink was pretty funny, too.
>
> Oh yes. Not sure how close to reality it was, but funny indeed!
A few years ago, huge shift in philosophy happened in Oracle Corp. They
stopped publishing internal information, 11G has a whole slew of the new
processes that are completely undocumented, they started producing
features as options, my pet peeve being the AWR report, and their prices
went up. Also, flashback process added a whole new class of events and
processes which are completely undocumented and not tunable. They also
started buying their competitors: Peoplesoft, BEA and, the latest, SUN
Microsystems. Their licensing policy also used to be pretty lenient. With
OCM, they are engaging in "big brother is watching you" stuff which I
definitely do no like. At the same time, the code quality went down
rather drastically: OEM was practically unusable before 11.2 are there
are plenty of rather critical bugs. The latest thing I finished testing
was de-duplication and compression of LOB columns. I had 24GB expdp,
produced by the version 10.2.0.4, file which I tried importing into 50GB
of space. One would expect that to succeed, with the de-duplication
turned on and compression set to "high", but it ran out of space. So much
for the "securefile" storage.
Basically, this is not the same company as it was when I started doing
Oracle 4.1.4 on IBM PC XT and when the Oracle installation set came in
3 gray boxes with 5 360k 5.25" floppies. At that time, Oracle was open,
helpful and nimble company that was fighting IBM, Ashton-Tate, Sybase and
Ingres. Now, they are a monopolistic juggernaut with a choking stronghold
over the database market, prince charming turned into the king of Id.
-- http://mgogala.freehostia.comReceived on Thu Nov 12 2009 - 07:50:14 CST