"Howard J. Rogers" <dba_at_hjrdba.com> wrote in message
news:dKEJ8.28$361.211_at_news.oracle.com...
> It's the perennial problem: do you tell an approximation of the truth
which
> is technically inaccurate, but which will "do" for 70% of the DBAs who
have
> nothing too large or to strenuous to manage, and is relatively simple to
> grasp; or do you tell the nitty-picky technically accurate stuff, the
> reasoning for which can be quite hard to explain and/or understand, and
> which quite often won't make a major difference to
> performance/resilience/whatever?
Indeed. There is a parallel in Chemistry education, and the model of the
atom. You learn how the atom is structured for your secondary school
education. you then go on to higher education and discover everything you
learned was incorrect (and in fact broke the laws of physics) so you learn a
new model. Then you go on to university... The point is for most folks
thinking of atoms as a bunch of discrete particles orbiting a central
nucleus is just fine. the more accurate picture just gets silly quickly.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
Received on Fri May 31 2002 - 02:39:04 CDT
