Re: Books to suggest
- From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:13:51 +0100
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 05:33:19 -0700 (PDT), Rachel Carmichael
<wisernet100@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What? You mean to tell me you haven't bought a copy so I could get that
> $0.0001 in royalties?
Absolutely not - its written in American after all and I don't do
foreign languages....
> Seriously, we did try to make DBA 101 as basic as we could. And in
> general, we tried to make it version UNspecific. We did note where
> things were different between versions. Based on comments from readers
> of the first version, we did about a 60% rewrite of the 9i version --
> not to include the "cool" 9i stuff but to make concepts clearer. It's
> hard to include all the new stuff, while keeping the important old
> stuff, when you don't get an increased page count.
I do think that versions are important for some types of book, and DBA
101 would be exactly one of those. I'm not for example a great fan of
the 'self-managing database' tag line from our favourite software
supplier, but management tasks for 10g are significantly different
than those for 6.0.36 (where I started). Actually they are probably
quite changed from 8i as well.
Performance management is far less changed - do as little as possible
as infrequently as possible would be a good adage here. - by version
numbers. The same applies to good development practice and good
design.
> Publishers feel, rightly or wrongly, however that the buying public
> wants the latest version number on the cover of the book.... So
> Jonathan's book, version unspecific that it is, loses because of that
> silly "8i" on the cover.
I suspect that publishers are correct - anyone here interested in a
7.3.4 book? Mogens obviously needs to write a v5 book but I suspect
self-publishing is the way to go for that one. I also have some
sympathy. If I ask in an online forum "how do I avoid fragmentation?"
I'll get a bunch of response saying it isn't an issue if I'll only run
with ULMTs, a bunch of responses asking why I think I have a
fragmentation problem and a bunch of responses asking me to state the
Oracle version *because it is relevant to my question*. All of these
are sensible responses for a specific question - they also ought to be
relevant for a book.
I also agree with Jonathan's statement in his preface as an approach
to Oracle Management, but still think the book is, to a lesser degree
than most but still not insignificantly, version dependent (meaning
not it is irrelevant for 9i/10g but that it is of less use for v8.0
and below).
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
