Re: Oracle 10g Server on Windows XP Pro

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:<40bcf07b$0$31675$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:91884734.0406011244.22d61095_at_posting.google.com...
> > "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
> news:<40b78794$0$8986$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> > > "Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message
> > > news:91884734.0405280943.2fc4b8c9_at_posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I think there may be a skew that throws off that deduction. Perhaps
> > > > those who have downloaded 10g up to now are likely "bleeding-edgers"
> > > > who are likely to be able to deal with the problems, or are newbies so
> > > > overwhelmed they don't even know to post here and give up.
> > >
> > > Well, that is just speculation, isn't it? The simplest answer usually
> being
> > > the right one, the more appropriate deduction is that likely there is
> no/few
> > > problems.
> >
> > Well, we can agree to disagree on this one, as I don't think yours is
> > necessarily the simplest interpretation.
> >
> > >
> > > > That may well change in the near future as more "mainstreamers" deal
> > > > with the issues. I'd surmise if you got a representative group of
> > > > several thousand working Oracle DBA's together, only a small
> > > > percentage would have done 10g so far, and much smaller still in
> > > > production. Are you sure those several thousand downloaders aren't
> > > > several hundred doing it ten times?
> > >
> > > The size of it, and the time taken to download it, rather suggests
> > > otherwise. You would have to be monumentally stupid to *want* to
> download it
> > > more than once.
> >
> > Maybe not in your part of the world, but here most places have fairly
> > fast access. It's only 3 or 4 times larger than some db patches.
> >
> > Not being insulting, just curious, how many times have you downloaded
> > it?
>
> I've lost track of what we're talking about, actually. 10g?? If so, I've
> downloaded it once here (the Linux version). I would have downloaded the
> Windows version, too, only a poster here was kind enough to do it for me and
> mail me the CD. Incredibly kind of him, and he has broadband. It took me, I
> think, 4 or 5 days to download the Linux version. I won't be re-downloading
> it in a hurry. Even when I have access to a broadband link, which is but
> occasionally, I would download once, burn onto CD, and only ever re-download
> when I scratch the CD to death. I can't see why anyone would want to
> repeatedly download something which you can burn after the first time.

We were talking about ease of download and whether the 10g rdbms is easy to install on XP. I wouldn't know about the latter.

But I do know that it is very common to get an "umm?" response when I walk into a small place and ask where their Oracle installation cd's are. And broadband or similar are very common both in work and home around this part of the world. I don't have a cd burner at home, and frankly, given the fragmentation of the burner market I won't get one unless it happens to come with the next PC I buy. Which always seems to be just a few thousand dollars beyond my budget when you factor in everything.

>
> > They imply one thing, at least: that the 10g database has not yet
> > been shown to be fully sorted out for use with Oracle's own
> > application server, although it is "certified."
>
> Yes, but it is ever thus. When "9iAS" first came out, it didn't work with
> the 9i database, IIRC, but only 8.1.7.
>
> >I suppose it is
> > possible to say that you can't assume different Oracle products have
> > similar quality control processes, but it would be simpler to assume
> > they do.
>
> Well, again, we'll have to differ. I think AS creaks as a product (it may be
> better in the latest version, I haven't checked). 9iAS first release was
> awful. Second release was getting there. But it is obviously, er, shall we
> say 'immature', and I would never say that about the rdbms. So I don't know
> about quality control: I'm sure they go through the same sort of processes.
> But there's far less mature quality in one product than in the other to
> control in the first place, however it's done!
>
> Regards
> HJR
OAS10g is much more insidious, it doesn't seem to crash given enough hardware, things just "go away" at odd times, and the user interface can be confusing. We're in agreement on AS as a product, but my point is that I think your arguments towards the OP were too harsh given the reality of an experienced computer person inexperienced in Oracle attempting to install it. The upside is we can suggest to Oracle how to improve the install for such situations. OUI simply needs to perform more checks.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
How come every time I see an Oracle job advertised at Sony, within a
few weeks I see something being shut down there? 
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040602/news_1b2sony.html