Re: Are most DBA jobs on UNIX or Mainframe, not NT?

From: Stephen Harris <sweh_at_mpn.com>
Date: 25 May 1999 22:52:23 GMT
Message-ID: <7if9j7$epl$2@nebula.mpn.com>

Bas Scheffers (bas_at_datadesign.nl) wrote: : On 25 May 1999 06:49:07 GMT, sweh_at_mpn.com (Stephen Harris) wrote:

: >So change your shell to ksh which comes with solaris, and you end up with
: >a shell that is 100 times superior to bash. "set -o vi" or "set -o emacs"

: This wasn't meant as Solaris bashing in any way, it's a good OS, every

And my posting wasn't a Solaris defense in any way. I use Solaris, HPUX and Linux professionally (Linux is mail/news/ftp/dns, Solaris is DB/Web and HP is DB/Finance). But bash _is_ deficient when compared to ksh IMHO :-)

: Actualy, the Sun guy that delivered and demonstrated our first
: Enterprise 250 saw we were a Linux shop and asked us why we didn't
: just install linux/sparc!

For experimentation and learning of Oracle, Oracle on Linux i386 is pretty good. And Linux PC's are cheap! But I wouldn't trust Linux with my financials data, despite liking it very very much. Heh, I've played with Linux since 0.12 days :-) Once you spec a PC to the stability requirements of a HP K class or a E3000 (mirroring, redundance CPUs etc) the machines get expensive. And Linux Sparc is still in the "wow, it works!" category, rather than in the "how well does it work" one.

rgds
Stephen Received on Tue May 25 1999 - 17:52:23 CDT