Re: Db2, Oracle, SQL Server

snip

> My claim is that IBM is dead wrong in their (dis)information about
> how long it takes to recover. Their claims are the wild ones.
> Having said that I have yet to lose any data with RAC, although
> we had some very unstable moments initially.
>
> The last paper quoted is simply a sad joke. What was that about
> someone at IBM "inventing" rollback and rollforward recovery "for
> databases" in mid 80s?
> I guess the rb/rf recovery in DMS1100, DL/1, IMS, etcetc, (since
> around 1975 that I know of) was what? A figment of IT's collective
> imagination? The amount of crap that comes out of IBM marketing
> these days is mind-blowing...

( compared to oracle's marketing? )

I did not tell anyone to take the paper seriously. In fact I said it was obviously marketing driven.

What I said was that most oracle professionals would acknowledge that some of the information in there concerning oracle and rac was correct.  No free lunch.

That was my point.

To then try and read and re-read the article ... finding any flaws in it ... when that was not my point ... well that seems a little extreme.

You seem very reticent to acknowledge that anything that you say might not ever be 100 percent accurate all the time.

Is this an australian thing?

Welcome to the real world! Received on Mon Feb 21 2005 - 18:51:55 CST