oninit warning.....

Art S. Kagel wrote: > The engine process is 'oninit' and the initialization > flag is '-i' which will prompt you to make sure you want to do that since > if there were an already configured database structure on disk it will > wipe it out, so you also need the '-y' flag to eliminate the prompt since > you know it is safe the first time. I'd have to disagree that the prompt lets you know the database will be wiped out. As an Online newbie a couple of years ago I blew away a customer's database with oninit -i. The prompt asked if I was sure and told me that the database would be 'unavailable'. I thought the database would be 'unavailable' while the initialization process took place and since the customer couldn't gain access to the database anyway.......... I would have preferred to see something like: "WARNING! This will DESTROY any existing database! NOW, are you sure you wanna do this? " or if they really have to use the term 'unavailable' at least pair it with another word: "PERMANENTLY unavailable" "IRREVOCABLY unavailable" "ETERNALLY unavailable" Anything would have been preferable to the inoccuous warning that implies "Temporarily" to those of us who expect our warnings to be explicit. -- Carlos Benjamin, Jr. x 2364 mailto:inf999@cap-az.com

Info Temp wrote: > > Art S. Kagel wrote: > > > The engine process is 'oninit' and the initialization > > flag is '-i' which will prompt you to make sure you want to do that since > > if there were an already configured database structure on disk it will > > wipe it out, so you also need the '-y' flag to eliminate the prompt since > > you know it is safe the first time. > > I'd have to disagree that the prompt lets you know the database will be wiped Sure it does. At least that is what it is trying to do, it is just being so wishy washy about it that one does not neccessarily get the danger one is in. Oddly contrast that with the prediction of doom and gloom that occurs when you drop a chunk which is a fairly innoquous event. > out. As an Online newbie a couple of years ago I blew away a customer's database > with oninit -i. The prompt asked if I was sure and told me that the database > would be 'unavailable'. I thought the database would be 'unavailable' while the Actually it says "inaccessible" which is just as wishy washy. I cannot disagree that the language should be stronger. > initialization process took place and since the customer couldn't gain access to > the database anyway.......... > > I would have preferred to see something like: > "WARNING! This will DESTROY any existing database! NOW, are you sure you wanna do > this? " > > or if they really have to use the term 'unavailable' at least pair it with > another word: > "PERMANENTLY unavailable" > "IRREVOCABLY unavailable" > "ETERNALLY unavailable" > Anything would have been preferable to the inoccuous warning that implies > "Temporarily" to those of us who expect our warnings to be explicit. Art S. Kagel