(and I’m writing this from a positive<\/i> perspective)<\/p>\n
Now that the community is over the initial ‘Look over, there! It’s 11g!!!!’, there are some genuinely interesting blogs kicking around. (Maybe we need to give these things a little time<\/i>?) I’d better only talk about a couple, though, or Dave Edwards will start telling me off for pre-empting this week’s Log Buffer<\/a>!<\/p>\n For my part, my feelings about 11g haven’t changed from those I expressed to a fairly well known Oracle employee at last year’s UKOUG conference. I couldn’t see why people were so negative about the announcements in 2006. What were people expecting? Don’t they care<\/i> about minor incremental improvements, features to improve test environment management and the like? (I’m just waiting for Noons to pop up and request some bug fixes here!) <\/p>\n I don’t expect to see any dramatic changes in such a mature product, but there are shed-loads of tiny little, ‘Oh, I could have done with that<\/i> in the past’ improvements. I’m sad that way – I get excited about database-level default and temporary tablespaces and the like 😉 Getting the existing features to work the way I need them to is always a good starting point. In fact, Niall’s list on this forum posting<\/a> rang true with the way I see the world. My list wouldn’t be the same, but there would be some UNION there. (Damn, I try to avoid database jokes like the plague normally!)<\/p>\n Anyway, others have taken more time to play with 11g and Howard’s started a series on new initialisation parameters<\/a> which I’m looking forward to working my way through. Julian Dyke has also published some summary information on his website<\/a>.<\/p>\n There’s quite a bit of debate about what precisely the CONTROL_MANAGEMENT_PACK_ACCESS parameter actually does. The MMON process (to use one example) is still running, but I suppose someone would need to trace it to establish whether there’s any resulting overhead. The default value of “DIAGNOSTIC+TUNING” seems strange to me, though. Even as someone who has argued that the minority who license these options is significant, I don’t doubt for a second that it’s still<\/i> a minority and is likely to remain so. Based on that, it would have been far safer to have the default set to “NONE” to avoid anyone accidentally violating their license agreements and, on that subject, I see Mark Brinsmead’s had some response from Oracle<\/a>.<\/p>\n My highlight of the first few days, though, is a discussion over on Oracle-L<\/a> about the move back<\/i> towards an OFA-compliant directory structure<\/a>. I never truly got to the bottom of the muddled 10g approach and assumed I was missing something, but the fact that Oracle have reverted to the traditional approach might indicate that they were missing something! 😉 Yippee!<\/p>\n Either way, it’s all more material for my OFA-related presentation at UKOUG this year! (See, told you I had very boring tastes …)<\/p>\n Oh, and there are tons of excellent 11g technical blogs over at Amis<\/a> and Pythian<\/a>, but I’ll leave it there for now.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"