Oracle V Informix

Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've reached the following conclusion after a very short time. Oracle sucks. Thankyou.

Could you elaborate ? "David Brent" <brentmeistercomedian@hotmail.com> a 'crit dans le message de news:43d09671.0311060854.765659f8@posting.google.com... > Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've > reached the following conclusion after a very short time. > > Oracle sucks. > > Thankyou.

"Olmedo Monteverde" <o.monteverde@naville-livre.ch> wrote > "David Brent" <brentmeistercomedian@hotmail.com> a 'crit dans le message de > news:43d09671.0311060854.765659f8@posting.google.com... > > Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've > > reached the following conclusion after a very short time. > > > > Oracle sucks. does it matter?? oracle may suck, but informix is not going to be around after few yrs. I work with SQL Server these days and GOSH it really sucks rocks. But guess what. If I am looking for a new job now, I am going to pimp myself as a SQL Server expert rather than an Informix expert. There aren't many Informix jobs around and whatever is left is shrinking fast. Sad but true. A great product which has lived its life. I am completely disinterested in attending Informix user group in Toronto on Nov 12. Why bother for a dead product? Remember these two golden rules: (1) No product, however good it is, is worth working if it is dead. (2) No product, however bad it is, is worth mocking if it helps u getting a job and pay ur mortgage. ravi [ a database agnostic now ]

David Brent wrote: >Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've >reached the following conclusion after a very short time. > >Oracle sucks. > >Thankyou. > > The fact that you don't know something is hardly a reason to condemn it. Oracle is different: Very different. But for those that learned Oracle first and then go to Informix the response is the same. Freud once said "Sometimes a pickle is just a pickle". And a wise database developer or DBA views difference as just being difference: Nothing more: Nothing less. Get familiar with reads not blocking writes and writes not blocking reads and you might just like it. Get familiar with infinite locking resources you might just like it. Get familiar with infinite log file resources you might just like it. Get familiar with a skill set that will keep you employed in the future. ;-) -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

David Brent wrote: > Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've > reached the following conclusion after a very short time. > > Oracle sucks. Is this going to be this months protracted flame war? At least nobody has cross-posted to another group yet (I HOPE) Please everyone, just take a deep breath and let this one go by.

Andrew Hamm wrote: >David Brent wrote: > > >>Prior to my current Oracle job I was an Informix DBA (sigh!). I've >>reached the following conclusion after a very short time. >> >>Oracle sucks. >> >> > >Is this going to be this months protracted flame war? At least nobody has >cross-posted to another group yet (I HOPE) > >Please everyone, just take a deep breath and let this one go by. > > > Well I sure won't because flame wars are as useful as religious wars: Just leave everyone bloody. But if we are database professionals that is different from being marketing professionals. Mark and Obnoxio are paid to have a religious zeal: That is their job. May they do it well and with gust. Our job is to use the best tool for a particular job and what is 'best' varies from job to job, requirement to requirement. There are things I like about Informix more than Oracle: Table triggers for one. There are things I like about Oracle more than Informix: READS not blocking WRITES for one. They are different .... different does not necessarily equate with better or worse. Anyone that truly knows both products can pick them both apart. And if you can't you don't know them as well as you think. To engage in a TOAD is better than SQL*Plus is better or worse than any other front-end is as meaningless in Oracle as in Informix. I happen to like vi. Others like emacs. Others use notepad and look down on anyone that likes a $ or # prompt. That level of 'preference' is a debate between those that like blue better than turquoise: Meaningless. If someone wants to engage in a serious discussion, feature-for-feature, when it comes to solving business problems go for it. But I do, and will, object everytime someone posts personal observations far more grounded on whether red wine is better than white wine than any serious business issue. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Daniel Morgan wrote: > But if we are database professionals that is different from being > marketing professionals. Mark > and Obnoxio are paid to have a religious zeal: That is their job. May > they do it well and with gust. Did you just call me a marketing professional? Would you care to step outside and repeat that remark? I'm not paid to have the particular religious zeal of which you accuse me, it's purely a personal preference. I've worked enough with other databases to know what I like. And I only hope you meant "gusto". -- Ciao, The Obnoxious One "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo"

Obnoxio The Clown <obnoxio@hotmail.com> writes: > Daniel Morgan wrote: >> But if we are database professionals that is different from being >> marketing professionals. Mark >> and Obnoxio are paid to have a religious zeal: That is their job. May >> they do it well and with gust. > > Did you just call me a marketing professional? Would you care to step > outside and repeat that remark? I'm not paid to have the particular > religious zeal of which you accuse me, it's purely a personal preference. > I've worked enough with other databases to know what I like. > > And I only hope you meant "gusto". No, I think he was calling you a "wind bag"... ;) -- Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412 Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142 President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152 My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B

Ronald Cole wrote: >Obnoxio The Clown <obnoxio@hotmail.com> writes: > > >>Daniel Morgan wrote: >> >> >>>But if we are database professionals that is different from being >>>marketing professionals. Mark >>>and Obnoxio are paid to have a religious zeal: That is their job. May >>>they do it well and with gust. >>> >>> >>Did you just call me a marketing professional? Would you care to step >>outside and repeat that remark? I'm not paid to have the particular >>religious zeal of which you accuse me, it's purely a personal preference. >>I've worked enough with other databases to know what I like. >> >>And I only hope you meant "gusto". >> >> > >No, I think he was calling you a "wind bag"... ;) > > Glad you put that emoticon after your comment. What we need is more rationality ... less emotional jingoism. Informix developers and DBAs, over the next 5-7 years are basically going to move in one of two directions ... Oracle or DB2. They should probably learn a bit about both before letting the number of available jobs decide the issue for them. ;-) -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Daniel Morgan wrote: > Ronald Cole wrote: > >>Obnoxio The Clown <obnoxio@hotmail.com> writes: >> >> >>>Daniel Morgan wrote: >>> >>> >>>>But if we are database professionals that is different from being >>>>marketing professionals. Mark >>>>and Obnoxio are paid to have a religious zeal: That is their job. May >>>>they do it well and with gust. >>>> >>>> >>>Did you just call me a marketing professional? Would you care to step >>>outside and repeat that remark? I'm not paid to have the particular >>>religious zeal of which you accuse me, it's purely a personal preference. >>>I've worked enough with other databases to know what I like. >>> >>>And I only hope you meant "gusto". >> >>No, I think he was calling you a "wind bag"... ;) >> > Glad you put that emoticon after your comment. What we need is more > rationality ... less > emotional jingoism. Informix developers and DBAs, over the next 5-7 > years are basically > going to move in one of two directions ... Oracle or DB2. They should > probably learn a > bit about both before letting the number of available jobs decide the > issue for them. ;-) What a choice! I think I'll go become a bank clerk or something. -- Ciao, The Obnoxious One "Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo"

>> Informix developers and DBAs, over the next 5-7 years are basically going to move in one of two directions ... Oracle or DB2. They should probably learn a bit about both before letting the number of available jobs decide the issue for them. ;-) You don't rate MS SQL Server in your classes, then?

Neil Truby wrote: > >> Informix developers and DBAs, over the next 5-7 years are basically > going to move in one of two directions ... Oracle or DB2. They should > probably learn a > bit about both before letting the number of available jobs decide the > issue for them. ;-) > You don't rate MS SQL Server in your classes, then? I don't rate it in Informix's class. SQL Server has great marketing. And to that extent, and only that extent, it is a contender. But it isn't nearly as capable a database, nor is the single operating system on which it can run nearly as capable an operating system, as those of its major competitors. SQL Server's blessing and curse is Microsoft. The company still approaches just about everything it touches as though it is a stand-alone desktop. Wait until they put SQL Server on every desktop as the file system in a few years. The first TransactSQL virus will bring it all down. And all the DB2, Oracle, Informix, and Sybase sitting on Linux won't even notice. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote >You don't rate MS SQL Server in your classes, then? >I don't rate it in Informix's class. >SQL Server has great marketing. And to that extent, and only that extent, it is a contender. >But it isn't nearly as capable a database, nor is the single operating system on which it can >run nearly as capable an operating system, as those of its major competitors. >SQL Server's blessing and curse is Microsoft. The company still approaches just about >everything it touches as though it is a stand-alone desktop. Wait until they put SQL Server >on every desktop as the file system in a few years. The first TransactSQL virus will bring >it all down. And all the DB2, Oracle, Informix, and Sybase sitting on Linux won't even notice. Wishful thinking. Are u aware about SQLServer's steadily increasing license revenue (unlike Oracle's which is shrinking). They are already more than one Billion in database license few yrs back. Note: MS does not break up database license in their statements, but this figure has been mentioned in IDC report. I wouldn't be surprised if at this time they are #2 in database license figures. Their tools like DTS is excellent. Even in database server, their next release (Yukon) is a huge improvement over SQLS2000. It has got a v.good vendor support. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

rkusenet wrote: >"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote > > > >>You don't rate MS SQL Server in your classes, then? >>I don't rate it in Informix's class. >>SQL Server has great marketing. And to that extent, and only that extent, it is a contender. >>But it isn't nearly as capable a database, nor is the single operating system on which it can >>run nearly as capable an operating system, as those of its major competitors. >>SQL Server's blessing and curse is Microsoft. The company still approaches just about >>everything it touches as though it is a stand-alone desktop. Wait until they put SQL Server >>on every desktop as the file system in a few years. The first TransactSQL virus will bring >>it all down. And all the DB2, Oracle, Informix, and Sybase sitting on Linux won't even notice. >> >> > >Wishful thinking. > >Are u aware about SQLServer's steadily increasing license revenue (unlike Oracle's >which is shrinking). They are already more than one Billion in database license >few yrs back. Note: MS does not break up database license in their statements, >but this figure has been mentioned in IDC report. I wouldn't be surprised if >at this time they are #2 in database license figures. >Their tools like DTS is excellent. Even in database server, their next release >(Yukon) is a huge improvement over SQLS2000. It has got a v.good vendor support. > > > Samuel Clemens had something to say about statistics and statisticians. And buried in those MS numbers is every copy of it they've "sold" by including it in other software. By that reckoning Ingres is still a major contender. From what I know, and more than a small number of Microsoft employees have been my classes, they are a solid number three: Well behind IBM and Oracle. Hyperbole is what they are selling ... not all they are selling ... but a lot of what they are selling. You should be careful what you buy. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)