Re: help with site+database
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:09, Bulent Murtezaoglu wrote:
> Another lister replied as I was writing this and I agree with what he
> said also.
>
> RC> ... I spent a few days trying to
> RC> track down what was going on (and hack in extra environment
> RC> variables to the scripts etc). I encountered a number of
> RC> problems including inexplicable failures if I used native
> RC> threads through Java (Green threads worked).
>
> It took me about 4 hours to install the full product on woody back in
> March. It wasn't an easy 4 hours and could have been more like 4 days
> had I made unlucky choices instead of the lucky ones. The main
I think I made a lot of unlucky choices. :(
I was installing on Potato...
> Absence of consistency checks, detecting what it needs, detecting
> partial installs, checking from the JVM version instead of infinite
> looping, etc. all got choice words from me when I tried it. The
All this would be forgivable if they had some easily accessable tarballs!
Other commercial applications with bad install programs have sets of tar
files that get installed. So you have the option of bypassing the install
program. Not for Oracle though.
> but I would be very unhappy if it turned out I needed to have
> X+bandwidth available to apply vendor patches and such to a co-lo'ed
> production server. All that hassle so you use a mouse to select from
Absolutely! Those rotating mouse cursor things suck heaps of bandwidth!
> menus and watch bitmapped progress bars. Pretty stupid. I dunno if
> the people who wrote it are stupid, but if the target clientele are
> scared of non-GUI installs they probably are living in a different
> world than I am (euphemism for the s word when I cannot make a bullet
> proof case).
I know that I could develop a GUI install tool that is much more portable,
uses less bandwidth, has a command-line version, and looks just as good.
Therefore I believe that the Oracle install programmers are significantly
less skilled than I am.
> RC> The installation and maintenance of Oracle is a tricky thing.
> RC> Oracle consultants are also very expensive (and generally not
> RC> excessively skillful in my experience). For these reasons I'd
> RC> recommend Postgres over Oracle for serious applications.
>
> I don't agree with this. If you have a need and the budget for
> Oracle, you most certainly will also be motivated to run it on a
> supported platform. I'd have put is differently: make sure Postgres
> cannot do what you want before using Oracle for serious apps.
However there are other issues. For example management purchases a few large
Solaris machines running Oracle. As they are production machines they can't
be used for development. Wanting to run a test setup on a Linux laptop isn't
an unlikely requirement...
--
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: