On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 2:56 PM, fooler mail <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Orlando Andico <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> This topic wasn't originally between shared-everything and shared-nothing. > > take note where i bump in... they are talking about RAC scalability... > i just emphasize between shared-everything and shared-nothing...
And RAC does scale. Not to the clouds, but for almost all practical workloads it does. >> No, you say they use it and they are happy and they have no problems. >> That's quite a stretch from the Wikipedia entry, that's far more than >> just referencing. > > then challenge that wikipedia page those *prominent* users section > being mentioned... when i read the word *prominent*... it is logically > to think they are happy with it... Nope that's stretching the interpretation of the Wikipedia page. I can give some examples of high-profile public references turning sour internally but I won't. >> My point is that you broadly labeling me as unable to understand >> shared-everything is erroneous. > > no it is the other way around - shared-nothing... I stand corrected -- so you do admit saying I have an old person's mindset and cannot understand shared-nothing. Please correct me if my interpretation is wrong. >> And your understanding of Oracle >> Coherence is very incomplete. > > and i dont want to explain from you further... as it will keep on > meaningless debate... Yes it is meaningless. But you can't get away with calling people out as unable to understand something, and then dropping the topic when YOU get called out. >> You say I inject various topics to >> prolong the debate but the reality is that you can't resist taking >> personal digs at me. > > personal is nothing to do with here... but the irrelevant topics you > were injecting that prolong the debate... like this one now for > example... Yes perhaps it's irrelevant. But I didn't question your competence. .. > the previous posts of others already answered those questions... > > to make it clear.. i want to migrate from oracle to mysql because > those features in mysql already serve my needs and cost me less.. no > need to explain those oracle features to me... > >> Then you >> come in and say shared-nothing is superior... that RAC exhibits >> negative scalability... > > because it simply true... See. That's the thing. You cannot get away with broad generalizations like "RAC exhibits negative scalability... and it [sic] simply true" without getting challenged. >> that's where this prolonged debate began. > > it is really upto you orly if you want to continue this useless debate > already... Well yeah this discussion has turned sour and I feel embarrassed to the PLUG community at large. But I'm not solely at fault here. -- Orlando Andico +63.2.976.8659 | +63.920.903.0335 _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
