Re: help with site+database
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 12:25:25PM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2001 19:27, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> > IIRC, that was the first release for Linux. First releases are only
> > going to work on the target distribution, if at all.
> As far as I recall Oracle first came out on Linux in 1999. Would they still
> be on the same release almost 2 years later?
That's possible, when did 9i come out?
> > If it is a later version and this wasn't cleaned up, then we'd have
> > more cause for complaint.
> > Have you tried Oracle on RH? Was it a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel?
> > Anyway... I don't doubt that Postgresql is a great product, I'm just
> > saying that just because Oracle doesn't work on Debian doesn't mean
> > that it's crap.
> Fair comment. However I did not say that Oracle is crap, also I was not
> judging Oracle only on it's performance on Debian but also on my experience
> with Oracle on Solaris which hasn't been particularly positive either.
Oh. You didn't say anything about solaris in your other message. If
they've been on Solaris for several years, and the install is crap on
that too, then something is wrong...
This stuff reminds me of how I have to treat NT4 servers. Everything
has to be in sync, and if one goes out, everything is gone... :( Not
that you don't have to keep things in sync on unix (like libc, etc.),
but it's not nearly as fragile as NT...