Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Resources on Oracle

hello all,
  any one know of any good resources, books ,websites that have good infomation on writing stored procedures, or any thing  for Oracle, beside the Oracle site? :)

TIA

new_one
Thursday, May 27, 2004

www.orakle.com

will take you to all the major URL'S.

BTW, Oracle doesn't have the deadlock and locking problems discussed in another thread about MS SQL Server's deadlock problems.

I have found that NO ONE who has serious experience with several DBMS's would ever consider using MS SQL Server for anything significant. It's such a piece of ...

And to all you members of the Microsoft Borg Collective out there - show me just one multi-Terabyte MS SQL Server in full production, mission-critical status. Didn't think so...

Data Miner
Thursday, May 27, 2004

SQL for Web Nerds
by Philip Greenspun

http://philip.greenspun.com/sql/

Matthew Lock
Thursday, May 27, 2004

"And to all you members of the Microsoft Borg Collective out there - show me just one multi-Terabyte MS SQL Server in full production, mission-critical status."

You're right I can't show you one.

I can show you three, tho. Let me know if you want more:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/rosetta.asp

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,4149,1379610,00.asp
"Verizon Communications weighed in with a 5.3-terabyte SQL Server transaction-processing database, reaching sixth place in size for all environments, the top transaction-processing database on the Windows platform."

http://www.sqlteam.com/Item.asp?ItemID=7741
"Jim Gray was a key player in building the TerraServer, a 12-terabyte spatial data warehouse using Microsoft SQL Server 2000 as its building blocks. The TerraServer Web site averages 7 million hits per day"

And for good measure, what's this? SQL Server can play with the big boys *and* it's easier to develop on?
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/casestudies/casestudy.asp?CaseStudyID=14483  (an article about a little bitty website called nasdaq.com - maybe you've heard of it?)

BTW, you might want to go check some of my posts regarding the use of ad hominems and how they completely devalue your rant... er, comment.

Philo
[disclaimer: Philo is an employee of the Microsoft Corporation. The comments above are solely those of the poster and do not represent any official policy of Microsoft Corp]

Philo
Thursday, May 27, 2004

Now, back to our original post - what specifically do you need to do? Do you have an Oracle database running, or do you need to install it? Do you have a table schema you need to write an application against?

Oracle documentation (including aftermarket books) tends to be very narrowly defined, so we'll need a better idea of where you are and where you need to go.

http://technet.oracle.com is a good resource; just be aware that oracles for different platforms occasionally have minor differences (not in the SP's - in the configuration settings).

HTH,
Philo

Philo
Thursday, May 27, 2004

"Could someone tell me how to change the oil on a Chevy?

"Hondas SUCK!"

Insightful.

.
Thursday, May 27, 2004

Oracle 8i: The Complete Reference by Kevin Loney and George Koch http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0072123648

Some of the best money I have ever spent.

Usually books that have the word "Complete" in the title stink.  This one is almost actually complete...

K
Thursday, May 27, 2004

Microsoft did a similar press release for an MS SQL server deployment at a company I worked for.  It was completely fake.  It never went into production and never did anything useful.  Never the less, there was an enthusiastic joint press release between that company and Microsoft.  Needless to say I never take any of those seriously.

Oren Miller
Thursday, May 27, 2004

"And to all you members of the Microsoft Borg Collective out there - show me just one multi-Terabyte MS SQL Server in full production, mission-critical status. Didn't think so..."

I'll file this under "Solutions to use for multi-Terabyte full production, mission critical projects that prove SQL Server sucks" if I come across one.

Ah... to be young and against The Corporate Man

m
Friday, May 28, 2004

Philo,

My joke about the Microsoft Borg Collective is hardly ad hominem since I was not attacking an individual person (that's what it means in English). Also, my "rant" was a statement of my personal experience using databases (which spans three decades). Even though my comment, er, rant is completely devalued, I did look up your URL's.

#1 Genome Project. Yes, it's big, but hardly mission-critical, since it appears to have been loaded once and not updated. Also, the document states that query performance degrades beyond 8 concurrent users!

#2 Verizon Communications. OK, it's big. Quote from the article: "Microsoft still has to prove to large enterprises that the company "gets" large enterprises. While reliability gains are reducing the need to shut SQL Server servers down and then power them back up when things aren't working right, the perception remains that reliability just isn't there yet. As pointed out by Charlie Garry, senior program director at Meta Group, security is the other monster under the bed, and Microsoft hasn't slain it yet. "The security issues with the viruses and attacks and so forth are obviously significant," Garry said."

#3 Spatial data warehouse. Again, hardly mission-critical. For those who don't know this stuff, spatial databases store many images (which are large binary objects), which is why they are so big. Quote from Jim Gray: "We have been chasing the Object-Relational rainbow and we are near the pot of gold—an extensible database. Now you will be able to store objects in the database, and you will be able to treat databases as objects." Just as you have been able to in Postgres, Oracle, Informix, and DB2 for several years.

#4 NASDAQ. OK, it looks good in the article. Unfortunately, the "article" is a Microsoft Case Study and reads like a PR piece ("Thanks to SQL Server 2000, NASDAQ Prime has the fast time-to-market, mission-critical performance and reliability, and lower total cost of ownership (TCO) that NASDAQ was seeking.") The source completely devalues its validity, eh?

And. last of all, you fail to address the fact that, in SQL Server, locks are a limited resource and deadlocks are a serious problem. I haven't seen a deadlock in Oracle in at least a year, and I work on several multi-terabyte databases under heavy loads (the databases, not me)

Scott Tiger
Friday, May 28, 2004

hello Philo,
  i am going to try my hand at writing some stored procedures in PL/SQL :)

new_one
Friday, May 28, 2004

And you may want to check te pipelines:
http://www.revealnet.com/pipelines/dba/index.asp

Jack
Friday, May 28, 2004

Let me say that I am UNIX/Mac person who only once in a while touches a Windows box.  But I am really getting sick of this "Microsoft Sucks" on every other post.  Some one has a legit question about Oracle and some one has to give us some crap about about SQL Server and is obvious he has no idea what he is talking about.  If you want to do this stuff, go to Slashdot.

I salute Philo!  He actually gave the guy a good answer and he actually has a vested interest in the competiton.

Bill Rushmore
Friday, May 28, 2004

Resistance is futile! You will be assimilated.

Bums Rushmore
Saturday, May 29, 2004

I dont believe no one mentioned

http://metalink.oracle.com

Most useful Oracle site there is. However it requires you to have a support contract to be able to login. If you use Oracle, its worth every penny though.

As for free resources, try

http://asktom.oracle.com

Patrik
Saturday, May 29, 2004

"My joke about the Microsoft Borg Collective is hardly ad hominem since I was not attacking an individual person (that's what it means in English)."

LOL! Talk about trying to pedant your way out of it.

"Also, my "rant" was a statement of my personal experience using databases (which spans three decades)."

Uh-huh. Except that Oracle wasn't around for the first, and SQL Server wasn't around for the first two. But I'll take it on faith that you've had extensive hands-on experience with SQL Server 2000 over the past four years.

Now, two things I wanted to point out:
1) As I mentioned above, Oracle has had 20 years to build their capabilities and reputation, both of which are quite respectable. SQL Server has really only been a contender since 7.0, released in 1998. So in six years SQL Server has gone from "toy database" to us being able to have this discussion. In my own biased way I'd say that's worthy of note.

2) Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Oracle is an F1 and SQL Server is a Honda Accord. So for the hundred or so Grand Prix racers, Oracle is the choice. Fine.

But what are you going to recommend to your neighbor, who needs  a car to get to work? Your boss, who needs cars for his sales fleet? Your best friend, who needs a car to get across the country? Are you really going to point out that the Honda can't go 225 like the F1 can?

To argue that a product isn't worthy and cite .01% of the market as the reason isn't really a strong tactic. SQL Server is cheaper, easier to use, and has a lower TCO. When someone shows up here and has a heavily transactional mission-critical multi-terabyte database to choose a platform for, we can revisit this issue.

But when someone asks for a database recommendation for a business system, or just needs help on a specific platform, maybe you could actually offer some help instead of knee-jerk posting "heh, Microsoft evil; SQL Server sucks"?

Philo

Philo
Saturday, May 29, 2004

thanks for all the help, guys and gals

new_one
Sunday, May 30, 2004

>SQL Server is cheaper, easier to use, and has a lower TCO.<

Compared to what? It's no longer cheaper than Oracle on bigger systems (and DB2 UDB and MySQL beat it on smaller systems), it's not easier to use if you consider 10g, and TCO needs to include the cost of DOWNTIME, which is significant with any MS product (reboot my machine after downloading a driver?). And how many operating systems can you run on? Oh, never mind...

>"Also, my "rant" was a statement of my personal experience using databases (which spans three decades)."
Uh-huh. Except that Oracle wasn't around for the first, and SQL Server wasn't around for the first two. But I'll take it on faith that you've had extensive hands-on experience with SQL Server 2000 over the past four years.<

Um, er, did you know that there actually were databases around before Oracle or Microsoft? I was an IMS DBA before becoming a DB2 DBA, and later, an Oracle, Sybase, and MS DBA. And, yes, I had the dubious pleasure of building mission-critical systems for a now-defunct "dot.com" using MS SQL Server 7.0, which was so bug-ridden as to be almost unusable. I have worked with SQL Server since it was Sybase 4.2. I probably have more experience with SQL Server than many Microsofties.

>But when someone asks for a database recommendation for a business system, or just needs help on a specific platform, maybe you could actually offer some help instead of knee-jerk posting "heh, Microsoft evil; SQL Server sucks"?<

The original poster was asking for Oracle URL's, not a recommendation for a business system. I just threw in my comments about the other thread just to piss off the Borg. It seems I was right, you can never leave The Collective...

I think that Oracle has some serious a****les in its upper management, especially in sales, but the technology is seriously heavy duty. Only IBM's DB2 is on the same level, and that's because their optimizer is outstanding. And yes, I do believe that Microsoft is evil and I KNOW that SQL Server sucks...

Microsoft is seriously hindered by two things - the product is totally integrated with a single OS,and it is architecturally derived from an outdated client/server model. As I pointed out previously, locks are a limited resource, which is a common problem in DBMS's (except Oracle, which has unlimited row-level locks), and this often leads to serialization problems and deadlocks (which was the subject of the other thread, if you bothered to read it). This is particularly relevant to scalability.

Come to think of it, Microsoft is hindered by only one thing - the Collective's belief that only the brilliant Microsofties have invented anything of value, and that any criticism of them is from evil and inferior scum. The idea that someone else's products might actually be better (can you use Quicken in a sentence, children?) is totally incomprehensible to them.

BTW, the movie remake of "The Stepford Wives" just came out - could it have been filmed in Redmond or Bellevue?

DataMiner
Monday, May 31, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home