Wednesday, December 13, 2006
For the bargain basement price of just $99,000 you get to minimize the upfront cost of initial adoption. Or to put it another way, you get 2 cpus, 5 named users and a UDDI registry that will allow you to define just 25 web services.
Why on earth would anyone want to pay that much to adopt a vendor-ized version of open standard technologies? Now if they had said this was a free community edition, they might be in with a chance of luring unsuspecting punters in and hitting them with the upgrade later. But this way round? Seems daft to me...
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Coincidentally Gartner's latest Magic Quadrant for Data Integration Tools has recently materialised. Informatica gets a positive write up - its stands alone with IBM in the leaders quadrant, head and shoulders above the pack (including Oracle).
Sadly my former Constellar colleagues at DataMirror don't even get on the map - DM just gets a rather dismissive one line mention for Transformation Server in the also-rans section. Is DataMirror under-marketing its product range - including Constellar Hub, or is Gartner just not too impressed with it?
Friday, December 08, 2006
Everyone's talking about it - statspack isn't perfect. Driven from Jonathan Lewis to Doug Burns to Daniel Fink's OptimalDBA I thought it was worth pointing out that as a snapshot technique, your knowledge of the value of the increment is uncertain.
Suppose snapshot N of metric has value s(N)
lets call the increment N to N+1 x(N)
All we can say for sure is:
A) if f(N+1) <>= f(N+1)
B) if f(N+1) >= f(N) then x(N) >= f(N+1) - f(N)
In normal use (when the shared pool is stable), we only see the case B, and we replace the >= with =. But if your shared pool is being trashed (see earlier posts) then remember uncertainty, and consider building case (A) into your reports.