Comedy Errors

Oracle Comedy Errors Home

Welcome to the Oracle Comedy Errors Page!

This page is dedicated to all those frustrating hours that you have to spend fiddling about with Oracle just to get it working as it says it does on the box.

These are just things that have happened to me and the projects that I have been involved in. To make a really complete Oracle Comedy Errors Page we need your input.

For those that have already contributed, there is always this page. It also catalogues the projects and Oracle software that I’ve used to build up this list.

Why is this page here?

There seems to be a great number of people who are only too eager to bash Microsoft, but only a few who seem to hate Oracle. Looking at their products, I thought that there must be at least a few sympathetic souls on the net. A quick search on HotBot and Altavista seems to indicate otherwise.

To rectify this shameless situation, I aim to produce, if not the first, then the definitive list of Oracle cock-ups and anecdotes. Naturally, I can’t do this all on my own; there are others.

I can supply the TAR numbers if you don’t believe me…

Content

Comedy Errors

Oracle Client Software Comedy Errors

Oracle Data Browser

Oracle Data Browser, part of the Discover 2000 suite, is one of the least amusing applications that Oracle supply. Not because it’s bad, but because it almost works…

  • Windows 95 has a ‘full screen drag’ feature (freely download-able from Microsoft‘s web site). If you load Data Browser you don’t. It suddenly stops working.
  • Now this is supposed to be a feature, but I’m not convinced. The word ‘Browser’ seems to indicate that it’s a read-only product. In fact a version comes with it that isn’t.

Oracle Data Query

Until we started really using SmartClient, we thought that Data Query, half of the Discoverer 2000 suite, was the lemon of the Oracle product library. That’s not to say that it’s good, just that after all that’s happened with Applications we’ve more or less forgotten a lot of the really annoying stuff. Lucky Oracle.

  • Data Query makes Windows 2.0 seem stable. Even in it’s 32-bit version.
  • It often magically moves the input focus to somewhere you don’t want.
Comedy Errors

About Oracle Comedy Errors

Credit where it’s due

I am unable to criticise a suite of products the size and complexity of Oracle on my own. There are a number of people that need to me mentioned. Remind me if I missed you out!

People

Thanks to Anna Brabants who nearly created the term ‘Oracle Comedy Errors’ and certainly did an almost continuous stream of abuse (not all of it at Oracle).

And thanks to the rest of the project team, who invariable love Oracle products as much as I do.

Thanks to the people at Oracle support who no doubt have to put up with a lot, and offer much amusement if only after the event.

Sources

I’ve been on a number of projects that use Oracle, however most of the tales have come from the first two. On these I was a DBA and developer and ended up spending much time on the phone to Oracle support.

The first time, we were implementing Oracle Financials and Human Resources using a Sun UltraEnterprise 1 server and Compaq workstations.

The server was running Solaris 2.5, with Oracle Server 7.1.6, Oracle Applications 10.6.1 and an incredibly large number of patches.

The Compaq P166 clients ran Windows 95, with SmartClient Prod 15. Then Prod 15.1. And then with a number of ineffective patches… You get the idea.

The second time, we were implementing a bespoke client-server application. The Sun Ultra 1 (and later Ultra 2) server was running Solaris 2.5.1 (2.6) with Oracle Workgroup Server 7.3.

The Compaq P133 clients ran Windows NT 4 and connected to Oracle using OLE Objects through Microsoft Visual Basic 5.

Since then I’ve worked mainly as a developer (often doing data-loads) on Oracle 8. Any 8i critiques come from developing my 8i on Linux HOWTO.

Opinion

Software Project Survival Guide

Introduction

For many people here, writing software is, if not a job, then a hobby. Our enthusiasm is a double-edged sword. Our technical knowledge is usually much greater than people who just develop software for a living. This sounds like a big advantage, but it’s not as large as you would have thought.

Let’s have a look in ‘Software Project Survival Guide’ (SPSG) to see what Steve McConnell, famed author of ‘Code Complete’ and ‘Rapid Development,’ has to say on the subject.

The most relevant bit I can find is in chapter two. It’s a project survival test. Out of thirty-three questions, only one (28: “Does the project team have all the technical expertise needed to complete the project?”) is directly related to our ability to effectively code.

That can’t be right, can it?

Content

While you’re still reeling over the consequences of that last paragraph, I’ll slip in some of the dull things that the book has to cover and finish with some of the more glamorous stuff at the end when you’re brain is back in gear.

Some of the most important stuff is ‘management.’ Whether it’s planning, quality assurance, tracking what’s been developed so far or checking on the number of defects, it’s not the ‘techies’ that are the most important.

At first this comes as a shock, but the more you think about it, the more it makes sense. Unless you know what’s going wrong, you can’t fix it. Unless the complete design is documented a team can’t effectively write the software quickly.

Think about Linux kernel development. It obviously work well, but it’s not terribly optimal. The same bug might get fixed several times and there’s not a huge amount of up to date documentation so people have to dive in at the code. For free software this works fine — since the time is usually free, but if you have deadlines and are under contract to deliver a working product on time you’re going to lose a lot of money.

Good bits

McConnell takes the three hundred pages to explain these past two paragraphs in detail. It sounds very dull, but he has a clear, friendly style that makes it, if not entertaining, then not as dull as it might have been.

He splits the project into stages, explains in broad terms what they are and documents each one in more detail in the later chapters. It’s all very clear and logical leaving you in no doubt what stage you’re currently at and what you should be doing for the successful execution of it.

Bad bits

‘Code Complete’ is a book that just about everyone that writes computer programs should read. ‘Software Project Survival Guide’ does not fall into the same category. The book should be read by “anyone who has a stake in a software project’s outcome” according to the preface, but that is only accurate once you define the type of project it covers.

To cut a long story short, if you write software professionally you should read it. It’s probably more use to managers and team leaders, but you can be a better developer if you know the kind of things that need to be done. Besides, almost everyone will be in charge of people at one point and will need a broader picture than merely what the other modules do. (Well where I work that’s true, anyway.)

It covers projects that have a customer whether that’s an internal customer, an external client or people that buy shrink-wrapped software. What it doesn’t cover are software projects like Linux, massive sprawling projects developed because someone is interested in doing it. This is not unreasonable. Half the challenge in a ‘normal’ project is tracking whether you’re running to schedule. If you don’t have a schedule and cost target it doesn’t matter. However, maybe we could take a few hints from the book to ‘streamline’ the process.

Overall

Steve McConnell has done it again. I don’t think that it will go down as a classic like ‘Code Complete,’ but SPSG is an indispensable book for any developer that has any interest in the process and not just lines of code.

The facts

Author: Steve McConnell

Cost: ?22.49

ISBN: 1-57231-621-7

Buy this book from Amazon.com of from Amazon.co.uk.

Opinion

Open Sources

Introduction

This is a very strange book by almost any criteria. Firstly, much of the content is available on the web in one form or another. This includes an appendix which is literally a Usenet discussion printed. Secondly, most of the writers are techies first and writers second. You don’t get that kind of admission from most writers, even when it’s obviously true.

Content

There are fifteen essays by eighteen writers. I’m not going to go through all of them, but I shall note some of the highlights.

The style prize, without doubt, goes to Larry Wall for ‘Diligence, Patience, and Humility.’ It’s one of the longer essays, has dozens of useless-looking diagrams and for much of the time seems to go nowhere. You keep reading, though. You may not see where it’s going, but you’re intrigued. And it’s worth it — despite initial appearances, it does go somewhere!

As a Linux-biased web site, I couldn’t miss out Linus Torvalds piece, ‘The Linux Edge.’ His simple message — Linux has survived by having a good design — is thoroughly investigated, but the best bit is that he criticises just about everyone else in the industry, often without much justification, and still comes out the other end smelling of roses! I’m not sure how he did it, but I know I’d hate Bill Gates more if he said pretty much the same things.

As always he comes across as very modest, and attributes many of the good ideas to other people.

I liked Marshall Kirk McKusick’s potted history of Unix too. I think I’ve seen much of that before, but not in one place.

Since he practically started the whole thing, I need to mention Richard Stallmans ‘The GNU Operating System and the Free Software Movement.’ It’s an interesting piece in that he contradicts some of what the other authors in the book have to say (as has been well documented, he dislikes that phrase ‘Open Source’ and demands that people call it ‘free’ software). It’s clear that he knows exactly what he wants and where he wants to go, but it’s equally clear that he’s going to put a lot of businesses off free software if he keeps going the way he is. RMS, I respect what you’re saying, but calm down!

The final mention goes to the two Eric Raymond essays. Raymond has been at the centre of the Open Source movement since the Cathedral and the Bazaar,’ and fully deserves the opportunity to write two pieces in Open Sources. The first piece ‘A Brief History of Hackerdom,’ describes the key points and people that gave rise to our current position. The second, ‘The Revenge of the Hackers,’ looks to the future.

Like much Raymond stuff, some is ‘personal’ and has a number of anecdotes about himself. It seems that many people hate this, but I feel that where it doesn’t get in the way of the message and while it’s still interesting and well written, it’s fine. The two essays are, indeed, fine.

Overall

I can’t really criticise this book. All the people in it are more influential than myself, better developers than myself, better writers than myself or, more commonly, all of the above. So while I like some of the writer more than others, and while I actually disagree with some of the assertions made, it is, at least, well written and thought provoking.

As a book intended to document the new-found popularity of the Open Source model, the book is a classic and a must-buy.

The facts

Author: Edited by Chris DiBona, Sam Ockman and Mark Stone

Cost: US$24.95

ISBN: 1-56592-582-3

Buy this book from Amazon.com or from Amazon.co.uk.

Opinion

Engineer or Hacker?

Eric Raymond would have us believe that everyone that develops software for fun is a hacker. I know that historically this has always been the case, but that doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing. All good, and bad, things come to an end.

I doubt that it will happen any time soon, but I think that ‘hacker’ is a term that should whither and die.

The first problem, and this is the obvious one, is the public perception of it. Yes we all know that hackers write code while crackers break into computer systems, but how many people ‘outside’ know that? How many professional software developers, i.e., those who do it just for a living rather than for fun, know that?

If even professionals don’t know the difference, how can the rest of the population have a chance?

Of course there’s always the fanatical wing, those that claim that we should hit the problem face-on. We should call ourselves hackers because we know that we’re right and that everyone else is wrong.

It’s actually a very politically correct way of doing things, but I remain unconvinced that it works. Richard Stallman continues to insist on the term ‘free software,’ even though most people find it more confusing than ‘Open Source.’ None of this is about changing ideals or opinions, it’s just about the correct marketing of the term.

The second problem I identified is much more subtle. What does the term ‘hacker’ mean? My dictionary defines it as follows:

hack‘ vt cut, chop (at) violently;

It goes on, but that’s the important part. My objection comes from the lack of precision that the term implies. You get a program and violently cut and chop it around until, by chance, you get something out at the end that seems to work okay.

I hope you don’t develop software like that, I certainly don’t. Any half-decent developer follows a process, no matter how ill-documented. When you debug software you don’t just dive in adding ‘print’ statements all over the place, guessing where it goes wrong. Instead you make a hypothesis and test, modifying your original until you get a good idea what’s wrong, then you start with the ‘print’ commands or your debugger.

Does that sound uncontrolled and violent?

All that planning and precision, all the experience that it takes to be able to make a reasonable and accurate hypothesis sounds more like engineering of some kind.

And that it why I call myself a Software Engineer rather than a hacker, even when I write code in my spare time.

Photography, opinions and other random ramblings by Stephen Darlington