Re: SQL Server to Oracel

omlet_at_omlet.org wrote in message news:<dc6c1ff0.0406291431.ef3d9f8_at_posting.google.com>...
> joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) wrote in message
> >
> > "In general, if recursive calls is greater than 4 per process, the
> > data dictionary should be optimized and segments should be rebuilt
> > with storage clauses to have a few large extents. "
> > - OraclE 9I Performance Tuning WITH OMLET [
>
> This is a product for 8i,9i,10g! So your comments are misplaced. Self
> tuning; local management, undo segments and db_cache_size are not as
> widely used as you think. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion;
> you write books that you sell for $100 and as such you better be
> giving people their money's worth.

What makes you think I write books? I work, people give me money. They're happy, they keep giving me money and I keep working. This has worked for me since the 11/34.

>
> The book is about OMLET and tuning Oracle with OMLET; as such, only
> queries that made it into a version are reflected in the book. It is
> not targeting general audience.

Well, is the book targeting general audience that tunes Oracle with OMLET? Whatever, it has some long-discredited myths in it, mixed in with what may or may not be good advice. But there isn't a trivial amount of bad advice, which makes all of it look bad.

For example, you make a big deal about ratio tuning and keeping ratios above targetted amounts. One program that can set a ratio to any desired value doesn't prove the ratio is useless; but many other demonstrations along with it can, and have. Whenever Oracle releases something new, a lot of people take the information Oracle gives out and propagate it, with varying amounts of degradation in the process. Some of the ratio tuning ideas were worthwhile when kept within context, such as watching to see if a ratio changes in a system that has been stable over time, however, the context is lost when such ratio tuning is done as an end in itself. Your product is based on sand.

Ratio tuning may have been considered state-of-the-art tuning a decade ago. Many experts who have stayed leading edge realized the problems and myths that were being propagated are wrong, and have corrected, or at least changed, their methodology. Unfortunately, it appears your product congealed the problems, and you've been unable to adapt it. Simply looking at the docs, the product looks pretty, but there is a melange of myths that you are now unable to unravel because there is no facility for feeding back new methodology. So you are frustrated and acting out in newsgroups.

If any product claims to be self-tuning or automatically tuning or even just giving tuning advice, it must have a way to penetrate the abstraction layers to account for situations where it simply doesn't work, or works for the wrong reasons. By being authoritative without proper, testable explanation, a product will be worse than useless.

And having something around for years and not fixing the grammar looks pretty cheap too.

>
> > He even thanks Digital!
>
> I worked for Digital Rdb - the KODA group; and joined Oracle when they
> bought the Digital rdbms business and as such I thank Digital for
> doing that: having access to the Rdb code; which SQL server borrowed
> heavily. I added index only tables to Rdb and later to Oracle kernel.

So your expertise is hashing, or hashish? In case you forgot, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Equipment_Corporation

> Of course your mother helped me do that; she s*** nicely!

Please keep your necrophilia out of the public eye.

>
> > Jeez, makes me
> > nostalgic.
>
> see a doctor; perhaps the rags slipped! got the OMLET treatment or
> both!

Well, I used to think that Rdb was better than Oracle, but you may be convincing me I was wrong.

>
> >
> > Note to all Oracle professionals: re-read the manuals for new
> > versions, and pay attention to people who point out errors.
>
> I guess Oracle profs are capable of do that by themselves. Do not
> insult them or their intel. with your crab.

Well, of course I wasn't referring to you and your own manual. Not.

Go see a doctor about those parasites.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
"Crabs?  I thought they were furry little spiders." - Zap.