Re: Early 11g Advanced Table Compression #'s

I don't consider Roby's test cases are horrible. Anyone who criticizes
the hype seems to be criticized.  Look at the argument of Roby: "But,
then again, if your operations are that minimal, you probably aren't
creating enough data to need compression in the first place!"


Please do not preach me about ceteris paribus clauses used in the
philosophy of sciences.

The common nonsense peddled is like: It all depends. But the question
precisely is this: can one *systematically* explain negative cases?

I am being more charitable with Roby than with the oracle hype, of course!






On 8/17/07, Greg Rahn <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Could you explain exactly how any these tests reflect any type of OLTP
> workload?  That is the new thing in 11g correct that you are
> attempting to demonstrate performance on, correct?  Rather than
> commenting that the advanced compression is "quite horrible" I'd
> comment that your choice of tests are quite horrible.
>
> On 8/17/07, Roby Sherman <rxsherm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  Seems my mailer has cut off the apostrophe from the URL... It should be:
> >
> > http://web.mac.com/tikimac/iWeb/silicon/Roby_Sherman/Oracle_Certifiable/Entries/2007/8/16_11G_TABLE_COMPRESSION_-_Don%E2%80%99t_Believe_the_Hype.html
> >
> >
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: