Learning “New and Exciting” Things About Really Old Stuff
…that’s what Max Kanat-Alexander seems to be doing based upon his recent Oracle-bashing rant. Now, I’m not calling Max to the mat because I’ve learned that the Web grants virtual get out of jail free cards to people earning a living developing free stuff, and I have in the recent past been a user of bugzilla (Max is the primary developer), albeit not by choice. I never could get too excited about a bug tracking system that wasn’t integrated with customer support, contracts, field logistics and other general CRM. There certainly is no shortage of bug tracking software, but I’m not blogging about that.
Hey, Old Dogs: Time For New Tricks
The bit I don’t like about Max’s rant is the absurd assertion that Oracle professionals must certainly have never used any other database. I quote:
Most Oracle DBAs, it seems, have never used any other database system. Or they have, but it was in Ancient Times before there was a SQL Standard or something. (By the way, that would have to have been before 1992, when SQL-92 was made. Hi, welcome to the 90’s!)
The nineties? Please! The first SQL ANSI standard was 1986–7 years after Oracle made the first SQL-based commercial RDBMS with lessons taken from the System/R and other playbooks. Yes, 1986, which according to Max’s profile coincided with his days in elementary school. That coincided with the time period in which I was developing and maintaining Informix ACE/ALL applications that fronted IBM 370 mainframes. No, Max, Oracle professionals are not, by and large, rdbms-xenophobes. In fact, the opposite is true. Most shops that deploy Oracle also deploy other products because they have real data centers. By the way, using databases before there was a SQL standard (1986, not 1992) wouldn’t have much to do with SQL because it was, uh, quite scarce.
Max quickly throws us a bone:
I don’t think Oracle is a totally worthless product.
But seemingly recants with the following red-herring:
I know that my Oracle install stopped working once just because I had added, oh, a fifth database to it. Apparently you have to explicitly tell Oracle (with a very cryptic command that’s specific to just your system, because it involves filesystem paths) that you want to have more than about five databases.
I’m not even going to validate that assertion by discussing it. Wait, I changed my mind. No, I’m not going to do it-the assertion is absurd. Just because one tries to base more than 5 databases from a single ORACLE_HOME and had a filesystem-related problem certainly doesn’t mean it can’t be done or isn’t supported. It’s all about configuration resources. How about 80 databases from a single shared ORACLE_HOME in a cluster?
No, Max, we don’t like Oracle because we are ignorant. We use it to solve problems. Can some of those problems be solved by free stuff? I suppose, but I don’t care.
Max continues:
Okay, so I’m biased and I have an unusual viewpoint…[text deleted]…Most people aren’t porting a shipping ANSI SQL application to many different databases. But I am, which means I’ve learned a lot about all the databases.
Huh? Applications supported on all of Oracle, DB2, SQL Server, etc, etc? Avante Garde!
Finally, Max lays it all out there in true protest style:
- In every other database out there, an empty string and NULL are not the same thing. The Oracle SQL Reference tells you not to treat an empty string like a NULL (because they might change that behavior in the future), but they don’t actually give you any way to not treat it like a NULL!
- You can’t SELECT a CLOB (that’s a TEXT field to the rest of the world) if there’s a GROUP BY clause. What?
- Subtracting one month from March 29, 2007 gives you…February 29, 2007, a day that never existed. In fact, because it never existed, Oracle throws an error if you do that. Other databases just give you February 28 (or March 1 if you’re adding, I think).
- Oracle doesn’t support the ANSI SQL “LIMIT” clause, it uses something weird in the WHERE clause instead.
- Oracle has a hard limit on IN clauses of 1000 items. But it doesn’t complain if you OR together multiple IN clauses with 1000 items each…
- Oracle doesn’t allow identifiers to be longer than 32 characters (index names, column names, etc.).
- Oracle doesn’t support ON UPDATE CASCADE for foreign keys. Even MySQL supports that, nowadays.
And each of these 7 points have not been churned over and over about a million times on the Web?
Readers, have anything to say about this?




Recent Comments