Don Lewis wrote:That isn't what I said.
I don't want anyone to believe that, silly! I would welcome the acceptance by most that Oracle is just software.
If you want to believe the majority of Oracle behavior is random and cannot be reproducedWhereas I know the majority of Oracle behavior is consistent and can be reproduced.
Is it so hard to divorce the reality of being a DBA/Developer from the fanatsy of being a scientist?I really don't care how you want to twist and label it, the majority of Oracle behavior is consistent and can be reproduced.
No, it isn't. So chin up, shoulders back, swallow those hot, stinging tears of disappointment and rebuild that index!No because it doesn't disappoint me and it is more than likely not needed and a waste of effort.
Don Lewis wrote:So you want me to prove that more than half the time Oracle functionality behaves the same on multiple databases regardless of environment rather than producing inconsistent results? I don't think a spreadsheet would sell if it had that reliability never mind an enterprise database.
+"Whereas I know the majority of Oracle behavior is consistent and can be reproduced."+
How much, expressed as a percentage? Proof, if you please.
The "rebuild that index" thing is what we humans call humour. You have been caught out Tharg Zqilshm'Ping (of the Casseopieian gas planet Trumpus, which orbits star γ Cas) and your chief globule alien lord will, I fear, smite you for exposing your mission so early on.Oh.
Don Lewis wrote:Why not? They demonstrate instances where Oracle behavior is consistent and reproducible among a wide range of Oracle installations for thousands of users in multiple countries.
OTN posts marked as correct are, obviously, not good enough.
maybe I shouldn't have said that - someday someone might quote me as having said "he said he rebuilds indexes and all is well, just:D