Rather than relying on my evaluation of my expertise, how much better if metalink had a set of "rules" to characterize my previous interactions with metalink? The forums on OTN don't seem to have a problem awarding skill levels to contributors. Surely, Oracle can whip up a similar utility. FWIW, R, Gus On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Robert Freeman <robertgfreeman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think part of this issue is one of language/culture with respect to the > analyst. With a global support organization you are going to get people > who's first language is not English (or even American English). Thus, their > vocabulary will not be quite as wide as a natural speaker. Additionally this > probably makes for more halting and harsh sounding reporting, when in fact > that may not have been the intent. Finally I find the first level support at > Oracle to often be lacking. If you get a first level analyst making the > report (or perhaps they are trying in vain to paraphrase a development > response), they may not have the knowledge to accurately write what has been > reported. Some of the initial responses I get to SR's are nothing more than > the analyst going through the docs and finding something that I already knew > a long time ago. > > I kind of wish Metalink had a set of radio buttons so you could describe > your skill set (expert, advanced, intermediate, beginner) so they would not > do stuff like that. It wastes my time and I sometimes think that they do it > in an effort to just get the SR "answered"..... irrespective of the fact > that the answer is about as helpful as fire ants in Florida. > > It think it falls on us, as openers of an SR, to ensure that the reporting > is accurate and correct. Granted, we pay for support and we can complain > until the cows come home about how we should not have to do this, or do > that, but in the end if we follow-up and ensure accuracy and appropriate > grammar, etc we all benefit. That being said, I'll confess that there are > times that I'm just so frustrated with the Analyst after working an SR that > I just don''t want to have anything else to do with them. > > Just my opinion, YMMV... > > RF > > > Robert G. Freeman > Author: > Oracle Database 11g New Features (Oracle Press) > Portable DBA: Oracle (Oracle Press) > Oracle Database 10g New Features (Oracle Press) > Oracle9i RMAN Backup and Recovery (Oracle Press) > Oracle9i New Feature > Blog: http://robertgfreeman.blogspot.com (Oracle Press) > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Hemant K Chitale <hkchital@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 8:27:51 AM > Subject: Quality of Oracle MetaLink Notes > > > In the past 1 (or 2?) years, the quality of notes on MetaLink has > significantly deteriorated. > Some are outright misleading (and potentially dangerous to novice DBAs). > However, in recent months, I have noticed notes that are also > arrogant or disrespectful > to the customer. > > One example, one which I did send feedback to Oracle Support is Note > 558846.1. > > This is the feedback that I have sent : > > I find the language used in Note 558846.1 : > 1. Unclear > 2. Arrogant or dismissive > > The Symptoms section states > "Running a SQL script that returns a great amount of data on Windows" > while the Cause section, referring to Bug6867504 states > "On Windows if you issue highly recursive or very large SQL > statements you will blow the RDBMS stack" > > Is the Bug logged against "a great amount of data" > OR is it logged against "highly recursive SQL" > OR is it logged against "very large SQL statement" > > What is "a great amount of data" ? 5MB ? 500MB ? xx number of records > ? Some figure with respect to a fixed Buffer Size ? > What is "highly recursive SQL" ? One that makes 10 recursive calls ? > One that makes 100 recursive calls ? > What is "very large SQL statement" ? One that has a text length of > 5000 characters ? A length of 50000 characters ? A length of 5Mbytes ? > > Is the langauge "blow the RDBMS stack" one that is used by a > Technical Support person talking to a DBA/Developer ? > What does it mean by "blow .. the stack" ? Should it be "exceed the > hardcoded stack size of 1MB " ? > > What is related to the stack size ? "a great amount of data" OR > "highly recursive SQL" OR "very large SQL statement" ? > WHERE is the problem ? > > Is the solution section > "Note that any SQL statement that has a lot of repeated values is a > poor SQL and will probably cause such problems so it's best never to > use such bad SQL and try to tune your queries. > If you have a statement that will not work within the 5 MB stack that > you have adjusted, you will never know what the correct results are > anyway." > a REAL WORLD Solution recommendation ? (and, by the way what is "a > lot of repeated values" ? how many is "a lot" ?) > > How does your analyst define "poor SQL" and "bad SQL" in the context > of this particular Note and Bug ? > If I have an SQL statement that contains a very long INLIST such that > it exceeds a certain size (what size ?) is it "poor SQL" or "bad SQL" ? > And what does the analyst mean by "you will never know what the > correct results are anyway" ? Is THAT the sort of response > I expect from an RDBMS vendor ? > > > > > Hemant K Chitale > http://hemantoracledba.blogspot.com > > > > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > > > > > > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > > >