• TimmyT (unregistered)

    I'm curious, I've never worked on Oracle before, but have done lots of SQL work including clustering and replication - can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL? All I can think of is maybe Solaris is a little more stable than a properly configured and hardened Windows server. I don't care about marketing or end user perception, I want the truth!

    Any comments like "cuz oracal is teh best dood" will be deleted from my temporary tables...

  • AMerrickanGirl (unregistered) in reply to jgayhart
    jgayhart:
    metrician:
    Just for the record, CDR is an abbreviation for Call Detail Record not Call Data Record.

    I was at a wireless billing company for about thirteen years. "Call Detail Record" is the more common usage (and the one that I prefer). But, I have seen "Call Data Record" used on more than one occasion.

    My company has a CDR which is a Central Data Repository (it's Oracle, too!).

  • Dirk (unregistered) in reply to Jamie
    Jamie:
    Dirk:
    Can the reply button be removed for me, please? I tend to miss the quote button...
    1. Write greasemonkey script to delete div with "Reply" as it's text
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

    plz email me teh codez !

  • Peter (unregistered) in reply to Outlaw Programmer
    Outlaw Programmer:
    ... they couldn't take any Wall Street based company seriously if they weren't using Oracle....

    See the footnotes of http://paulgraham.com/venturecapital.html

  • (cs)

    My vote would have been for a version table. 1 Field varchar(15) value: 1.0.0.0

    Everytime the program was updated, this value gets bumped.

  • (cs) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Morasique:
    I have a database with a single table, with a single row that holds the contents of the flat file. That's how real programmers do it
    I predict a "wooden table" comment hard on the heels of this.
    You forgot the web service interface and the fax based reply system or, for the hard core, the post.

    Skizz

  • Ben4jammin (unregistered) in reply to alegr
    alegr:
    Ben4jammin:
    It would be like if I chastised my mechanic over the type of oil he put in my truck or something. There is a reason why he works on trucks and I work on servers.

    Mechanics at Tustin Toyota put cheap generic green antifreeze into my Toyota, instead of Toyota pink red antifreeze. I wonder how many engines are ruined by that.

    Even one would be too many. I guess they are totally un-encumbered by that whole "manufacturer's guideline" thing? My mechanic is also the owner of the shop. I like to think that gives him extra incentive to do a good job. That's what I keep telling myself anyway :)

  • Chris (unregistered) in reply to alegr
    alegr:
    Ben4jammin:
    It would be like if I chastised my mechanic over the type of oil he put in my truck or something. There is a reason why he works on trucks and I work on servers.

    Mechanics at Tustin Toyota put cheap generic green antifreeze into my Toyota, instead of Toyota pink red antifreeze. I wonder how many engines are ruined by that.

    Most likely, none. I've used "generic green" anti-freeze in my Toyota for 6 years with no ill consequences. Sometimes during the summer I even use *gasp* distilled water with a cleaning additive. Anti-freeze is a coolant: ethylene glycol + water; it's not rocket science and there's likely little difference in the Toyota brand other than the coloring they add.

    If you think you need Genuine Toyota anti-freeze, then you're as dumb as the marketing types in this article who think they need Oracle at all costs.

  • Crabs (unregistered) in reply to TimmyT
    TimmyT:
    I'm curious, I've never worked on Oracle before, but have done lots of SQL work including clustering and replication - can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL? All I can think of is maybe Solaris is a little more stable than a properly configured and hardened Windows server. I don't care about marketing or end user perception, I want the truth!

    Any comments like "cuz oracal is teh best dood" will be deleted from my temporary tables...

    I've been working in both, and I've found that SQL Server is actually better in many cases. T-SQL is more friendly (I think) than PL-SQL, and they give you better types to work with. SQL Server 2008 even lets you index on TEXT fields (which is a CLOB for Oracle users), which is pretty cool, even though you probably shouldn't do it. SQL server integrates much better with Visual Studio, and .NET handles its errors more gracefully than Oracle's.

    According to some of the Oracle freaks around here, Oracle has a faster processing engine. I haven't noticed much difference, but I'm not using huge amounts of data (<1,000,000 records per table in most cases).

  • Aleks (unregistered)

    Long time ago I was asked to develop a "microprocessor-controlled thermostat" for client's piece of machinery (to maintain its internal temperature).

    Before I managed to inquire about possibilities that we today treat as common (programmability, precision, multiple zones, level of control, etc.) I was specifically told that what the new device should do is as follows (translated quote):

    1. You will receive a signal from the existing mechanical thermostat telling you whether or not it was "too cold".

    2. When the microprocessor receives this signal it should turn on the heater. When the signal disappears it should turn it off.

    I then asked why did they need a microprocessor if they could wire the existing thermostat and a heater directly. The answer was that they could, but then they could not market their product as "microprocessor controlled".

    CAPTCHA: dignissim

  • coyo (unregistered) in reply to Morasique

    You must have worked where I did. However, when I was working there, the single record was on access, and access flaked out a lot, so the hundreds of columns table database file was copied for a backup.

    That's right, we had 2 databases per record.

  • Michael R. (unregistered) in reply to Crabs
    Crabs:
    SQL Server 2008 even lets you index on TEXT fields (which is a CLOB for Oracle users)
    Actually, I think that MSSQL 2005 and 2008 mark the "old" LOB types (TEXT, NTEXT, IMAGE) as obsolete (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187993(SQL.90).aspx). Microsoft prefers that you use the "new" LOB types (VARCHAR(MAX), NVARCHAR(MAX), VARBINARY(MAX)), which can also be indexed.

    Assuming you have a 2005-compatible MSSQL client, the new LOB types can be treated like regular binary and string types --- in particular, they can be returned in result tables all at once, without having to go through the stream reader interface. (But you probably shouldn't do that, either, at least not without checking the maximum size of the data already there.)

  • Aleks (unregistered) in reply to Crabs
    TimmyT:
    ... can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL? ...
    Crabs:
    I've been working in both, and I've found that SQL Server is actually better in many cases...

    It really depends on what you need and what are your priorities - there is no single answer "XYZ is the best". You have to think about price, performance, database sizes, parallelism and locking, portability (platform support), availability of drivers (e.g. SQL Server has traditionally had trouble with its Java drivers), licensing of both servers and drivers, availability of administrators and their expertise, etc.

    I've used SQL Server, Oracle, DB2, DB2/zOS, Sybase, mySQL, etc. and I found some things I like and others I dislike in all of them.

    CAPTCHA: facilisis

  • (cs) in reply to DWalker59
    DWalker59:
    I'm sure that Oracle can do this too, but when SQL 2005 was being developed, Microsoft used a Barnes and Noble (bookstores) database for testing. It held 1.3 billion sales records (for 2 years), and 8.4 billion inventory records. It worked fine
    Since M$ bought their code from Sybase, that's hardly surprising. Their use of Timbuktu works quite well too (Remote Destkop/asst) which was acquired the same way.
  • Steve (unregistered)

    I always insist that my auto mechanic use Snap-On tools since they are clearly the best. Any attempt to use a Craftsman wrench is unacceptable.

  • Michael R. (unregistered) in reply to Pecos Bill
    Pecos Bill:
    Since M$ bought their code from Sybase, that's hardly surprising.
    MS rewrote the Sybase code out of SQL Server 7: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_SQL_Server#Genesis
  • Been around too long!! (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent

    http://thedailywtf.com/Comments/Introducing_the_CSVDB.aspx#66470

    Wooden table isn't necessary.

  • Chris (unregistered) in reply to Jake Grey
    Jake Grey:
    Is the fact that this company's marketing department has power and influence at least equal to the people who actually create the product that is the company's raison d'etre still unusual enough to count as a proper WTF?

    This is situation normal in many software houses (including Microsoft).

    One place I worked at a "Technical Director" considered the programmers to be overhead.

  • ThingGuy McGuyThing (unregistered) in reply to Aleks
    Aleks:
    Long time ago I was asked to develop a "microprocessor-controlled thermostat" for client's piece of machinery (to maintain its internal temperature).

    Before I managed to inquire about possibilities that we today treat as common (programmability, precision, multiple zones, level of control, etc.) I was specifically told that what the new device should do is as follows (translated quote):

    1. You will receive a signal from the existing mechanical thermostat telling you whether or not it was "too cold".

    2. When the microprocessor receives this signal it should turn on the heater. When the signal disappears it should turn it off.

    I then asked why did they need a microprocessor if they could wire the existing thermostat and a heater directly. The answer was that they could, but then they could not market their product as "microprocessor controlled".

    CAPTCHA: dignissim

    How complex does a microprocessor have to be before it can be considered "microprocessor controlled"? If you have a list of available microprocessors, can you find one that is effectively Input=>Output? Could a voltage regulator be considered a "microprocessor" - by the marketing folks at least?

    And then, of course, charge them exorbitant amounts of money for the design of a critical component.

  • (cs) in reply to TimmyT
    TimmyT:
    I'm curious, I've never worked on Oracle before, but have done lots of SQL work including clustering and replication - can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL?

    It depends what "level" you care about.

    From a setup perspective, I found SQL Server infinitely easier to install. Maybe we just had a fubared installation but every time we needed to add a new Oracle instance, it was a battle with some old script that sucked or fighting with JDK versions to get the GUI installer working. SQL Server is the cutesy Wizard which is great when it works, but you're hosed when it doesn't (fortunately it always worked for me). I never clustered Oracle servers, but it was easy for SQL Server 2005 (not quite as easy for 2000 but not rocket science).

    From an ongoing maintenance perspective we never had any massive databases or massive traffic, but I believe this is where Oracle is supposed to take the cake.

    As an app developer, I like Enterprise Manager far better than Toad or any other Oracle DBA tools I could find. Just a matter of preference there.

  • Orange Elephant (unregistered) in reply to NeoMojo
    NeoMojo:
    Toger:
    IANAOE
    Hmmm, that's a new one on me. I'm going with I Am Not An Orange Elephant.

    Since recursive acronyms seem better for marketing purposes, I'd prefer "IANAOE ain't not an orange elephant".

  • m0ffx (unregistered) in reply to TimmyT
    TimmyT:
    can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL?
    I'm sure lots of people on TDWTF forums can tell you why it is NOT.
  • Sylencer (unregistered)

    The real WTF is all the comments discussing about "SQL Server" meaning the Microsoft implementation of "a" SQL Server...

  • (cs)

    I have an issue with the original design here. Why was the data simply not accessed directly from the original datasource?

    The article seems to imply that it is because they did not want to allow access to billing data. Hello? Anyone heard of database security?

    How about dumping the CDR data from the original database to a secondary database, if they were worried about ub3r h4x0rs stealing their billing data?

    Surely getting the data from the source which is (presumably) reliable would be a lot better than re-implementing what has to be a very tricky piece of code, given that you could probably not miss any CDRs, so you would need to have a very stable solution.

    Off topic: Does CDR record sound to anyone like the CDBRs? Those are the crudely drawn bunny rabbits from the boy with the immovable hair :-D

  • Cybercat (unregistered) in reply to m0ffx
    m0ffx:
    TimmyT:
    can anyone tell me from a unbiased DBA/systems engineer perspective why Oracle is better than SQL?
    I'm sure lots of people on TDWTF forums can tell you why it is NOT.

    Yeah, that's about it. Oracle is a giant memory hog, it's documentation and interfaces haven't been updated since 1992 and the whole thing is just a huge pain in the ass to maintain. SQL Server 2000 and above all have massively improved interfaces, you can do all the work you need in them with one tool and they work quickly and efficiently with little need to look things up. Basically take all those advantages and reverse them to get what Oracle gives you.

    Piece of shit.

  • (cs) in reply to Sylencer
    Sylencer:
    The real WTF is all the comments discussing about "SQL Server" meaning the Microsoft implementation of "a" SQL Server...

    REALLY? Is that the REAL wtf? That some people like to spend less time than typing out "Microsoft SQL Server" and shorten it to SQL Server? Even when it most situations of concern (including this one) it's completely unambiguous?

    You're probably one of those assholes who would argue someone who pronounces SQL "sequel" is getting two different languages confused and is therefore incompetent.

  • Les (unregistered) in reply to Cybercat

    TRWTF is that everyone's going on about how SQL Server is a better solution when no database was needed at all.

    Any real programmer could have solved this by piping the signaling message flow to an awk script.

  • (cs) in reply to Chris
    Chris:
    ...considered the programmers to be overhead.
    The last time someone accused me of being a cost center instead of a contributor to the bottom line, I told my entire team (development only, not support) to take 2 weeks off. I did too. I instructed everyone to turn off their beepers, screen calls from the office, and not to return messages from anyone at work.

    Front line support folks had nobody to call. When stuff broke, the support people couldn't get us to guide them through repairing and rebuilding things. When customers called, the marketing folks had nobody to ask so they gave out such misleading information that our customers called them on it.

    When we got back, the folks in upper management demanded an explanation. When I was through, they had a new view of what we contributed - and I got them to forgive the 2 weeks of vacation we had otherwise needlessly burned.

    Sometimes, the best way to show your value is to STOP doing your job!

  • Edward Royce (unregistered) in reply to Waffle
    Waffle:
    This comment better be stored in an Oracle 11i database.

    Bah!

    I plan on not commenting until this database is securely implemented in Oracle 22i. No Oracle 22i??

    I'll wait.

  • (cs) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Morasique:
    I have a database with a single table, with a single row that holds the contents of the flat file. That's how real programmers do it
    I predict a "wooden table" comment hard on the heels of this.

    How did you get a wooden table into your database? I know that BLOB stands for binary Large Object, but i did not know that oracle had such a loose definition of a Large Object...

  • Martin (unregistered) in reply to Markp

    It's not unambiguous. Just because you know what it mean does not make it unambiguous.

    Hint: A little googling will show you that both, MySQL and PostgreSQL have also been called "SQL Server"

    (It does ofcause not matter in this case at all, because it is a wtf no matter what implementation of a sql server they use).

  • a_very_short_perl_script (unregistered)

    We used our oracle server to store log entries. Each night a job would collect them and add them to a flat file. The comm was always a problem, so we also wrote the log entries to another flat file as they were sent to the database.

    Fortunately we had a DBA assigned to the product part time.

  • Ikke (unregistered)

    A software solution, a marketing problem

  • (cs) in reply to Chris
    Chris:
    One place I worked at a "Technical Director" considered the programmers to be overhead.
    And he was right--unless the programmers were working for free.
    snoofle:
    The last time someone accused me of being a cost center instead of a contributor to the bottom line...
    Contributing to the bottom line has nothing to do with it. If you receive a salary, then you are overhead.

    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit

    snoofle:
    Sometimes, the best way to show your value is to STOP doing your job!
    I don't know where you live, but in my part of the world that would be a quick and easy way to join the ranks of the unemployed.

  • v.dog (unregistered)
    "...they're going to be made liars. Can you just humor me and add Oracle 8i to the design somewhere?"

    "I have enough trouble politically as it is. I really appreciate this favor!" click

    ...Ultimately they delivered the final product with an Oracle database that had a single table which was used to store a handful of configuration parameters.

    The title's around the wrong way.

  • Rich (unregistered) in reply to Dude
    Dude:
    MySQL is solution
    Precisely. Those markete[e]rs aren't up to much if they can't drum up some marketing BS that mentions Oracle without actually claiming it's used. Some kind of comparison using the words "harness", "leverage", and "raw power" usually suffices.

    But what do I know? I haven't been to marketing school.

  • PublicLurker (unregistered) in reply to Aleks
    Aleks:
    Long time ago I was asked to develop a "microprocessor-controlled thermostat" for client's piece of machinery (to maintain its internal temperature).

    Before I managed to inquire about possibilities that we today treat as common (programmability, precision, multiple zones, level of control, etc.) I was specifically told that what the new device should do is as follows (translated quote):

    1. You will receive a signal from the existing mechanical thermostat telling you whether or not it was "too cold".

    2. When the microprocessor receives this signal it should turn on the heater. When the signal disappears it should turn it off.

    I then asked why did they need a microprocessor if they could wire the existing thermostat and a heater directly. The answer was that they could, but then they could not market their product as "microprocessor controlled".

    CAPTCHA: dignissim

    Many years ago when most C++ compilation involved using cfront, I was asked to do a consulting job where they wanted me to add some "object oriented stuff" to one of their existing programs. They didn't really have any idea what they wanted added/re factored, etc. They just wanted to be able to say that they were object oriented.

  • Rich (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit
    Surely you meant to say this?
    1. Employees 2. Customers 3. Overhead 4. ??? 5. Profit!
  • (cs) in reply to mstum
    mstum:
    How did you get a wooden table into your database?
    CREATE WOODEN_TABLE [ database_name.[ owner ] . | owner. ] wooden_table_name ( { < column_definition > | column_name AS computed_column_expression | < wooden_table_constraint > } [ ,...n ] )
  • PublicLurker (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Chris:
    One place I worked at a "Technical Director" considered the programmers to be overhead.
    And he was right--unless the programmers were working for free.
    snoofle:
    The last time someone accused me of being a cost center instead of a contributor to the bottom line...
    Contributing to the bottom line has nothing to do with it. If you receive a salary, then you are overhead.

    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit

    snoofle:
    Sometimes, the best way to show your value is to STOP doing your job!
    I don't know where you live, but in my part of the world that would be a quick and easy way to join the ranks of the unemployed.

    But then who would do all of the work for the pointy hairs to take credit for?

  • Rich (unregistered) in reply to snoofle
    snoofle:
    ... me ... I ... my ... I ... I ... I ... I ...
    Aren't you the big one?

    Can I just get the regular fries, please?

  • (cs) in reply to Ben4jammin
    Ben4jammin:
    I just love situations where people THINK you are an idiot for reasons that make you KNOW they are idiots.

    It would be like if I chastised my mechanic over the type of oil he put in my truck or something. There is a reason why he works on trucks and I work on servers.

    Oh, there are plenty of reasons to go chastise a mechanic over the type of oil put into your vehicle. If it isn't synthetic, it isn't touching my engine. If someone dares to put non-synthetic, they're going to get the biggest wrench I can find shoved up their ass until they get it right.

  • (cs) in reply to Chris
    Chris:
    alegr:
    Ben4jammin:
    It would be like if I chastised my mechanic over the type of oil he put in my truck or something. There is a reason why he works on trucks and I work on servers.

    Mechanics at Tustin Toyota put cheap generic green antifreeze into my Toyota, instead of Toyota pink red antifreeze. I wonder how many engines are ruined by that.

    Most likely, none. I've used "generic green" anti-freeze in my Toyota for 6 years with no ill consequences. Sometimes during the summer I even use *gasp* distilled water with a cleaning additive. Anti-freeze is a coolant: ethylene glycol + water; it's not rocket science and there's likely little difference in the Toyota brand other than the coloring they add.
    But ... it's not pink... Personally, I think all antifreeze should be colour-coordinated with the paint job on the car. I'm going with one that has go-faster stripes, myself.
    NeoMojo:
    Toger:
    IANAOE
    Hmmm, that's a new one on me. I'm going with I Am Not An Orange Elephant.
    How prejudiced -- many of my best friends are orange elephants.

    Well, I say friends. Drinking buddies, really.

  • Ed (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Chris:
    One place I worked at a "Technical Director" considered the programmers to be overhead.
    And he was right--unless the programmers were working for free.
    snoofle:
    The last time someone accused me of being a cost center instead of a contributor to the bottom line...
    Contributing to the bottom line has nothing to do with it. If you receive a salary, then you are overhead.

    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit

    Wrong! If you work on a project that generates profit, then you are direct labor and not part of overhead. And by work on, I really mean word on. You have to do the coding or put stuff together or something.

    If you manage, overhead. Maintaince? overhead. The guys writing the software you sell? Not overhead.

  • vpofmylife (unregistered)

    So it is safe to assume Oracle was promised some $$!

  • Global Warmer (unregistered) in reply to hehe
    hehe:
    oracle is the devil

    No, it is the devils bastard abortion child.

  • (cs) in reply to Ed
    Ed:
    Code Dependent:
    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit
    Wrong! If you work on a project that generates profit, then you are direct labor and not part of overhead. And by work on, I really mean word on. You have to do the coding or put stuff together or something.

    If you manage, overhead. Maintaince? overhead. The guys writing the software you sell? Not overhead.

    The guys who write software couldn't write it if their computers didn't work. Therefore the electic bill generates profit. By your reasoning, then, the electric bill is not overhead.

  • Global Warmer (unregistered) in reply to snoofle
    snoofle:
    OP:
    the database was completely superfluous since records were processed as they came in

    Ancillary: And if that server goes down while real time records are streaming by and you miss a record or two, or thousands?

    That was my thought when reading it too.
  • PublicLurker (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    Ed:
    Code Dependent:
    Employees == Overhead Customers == Profit
    Wrong! If you work on a project that generates profit, then you are direct labor and not part of overhead. And by work on, I really mean word on. You have to do the coding or put stuff together or something.

    If you manage, overhead. Maintaince? overhead. The guys writing the software you sell? Not overhead.

    The guys who write software couldn't write it if their computers didn't work. Therefore the electic bill generates profit. By your reasoning, then, the electric bill is not overhead.

    huh? That's not even good enough to be wrong.

  • (cs) in reply to Ed

    I think you guys are missing the point on that "overhead" statement. I think snoofle was trying to point out that some people forget that they are actually have to build a product before they can sell it. Here's a good post from the forums where we can all vent because everyone underestimates how hard it is to actually write software.

Leave a comment on “A Software Problem, A Marketing Solution”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article