[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[John Wallace]

On Aug 25, 11:52 pm, "Richard Maher" <maher... at hotspamnotmail.com>
wrote:
> "John Wallace" <johnwalla... at gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4bafbff2-37a1-4a3c-a1d5-3a035b1ddc96 at cf4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 24, 2:38 pm, koeh... at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Koehler) wrote:
> > In article <gmtZr.3213$_h6.... at fx03.am4>, ChrisQ <m... at devnull.com>
> > writes:
>
> > > I'm not sure that logic would make so much sense now...
>
> > My first UNIX did not have shareable libraries. So every program
> > that called printf has a copy of it, ...
>
> > MS-DOS was like that, too. Hello World in Fortran was huge on disk.
>
> > But UNIX and Windows caught up with VMS on that one a long time ago.
> > You need record support for several HLL, but there only needs to be
> > one copy of the code and read-only data.
>
> > What you don't get that way is the code you need to pass data files
> > between record oriented HLL and byte stream oriented HLL.
>
> "[Windows] there only needs to be one copy of the code and read-only
> data."
>
> (sorry if quoting out of context)
>
> Does the term "DLL Hell" mean anything to readers?
>
> Or the alleged "fix" for DLL Hell, "side by side" configurations (aka
> WinSxS, a term which readers can search for)?
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> I thought the GAC was their fix for DLL Hell?
>
> Then again the experts where I am all ship/install there own DLL
> copies/locations for every new web-site. (Including Oracle etc!) Otherwise
> it's just "too hard" and "you don't know what version you're getting".
>
> But IMHO the real problem here (will *nix as well as Windows) is no one
> seems to have the concept of a standard server build :-( They all seem to
> want to start with a blank disk and have the System Manager du jour run
> around Google/nuGet installing whatever he/she thinks is needed in any order
> and any version with some sort of standard tthresshold of omissions.
>
> MS "Clusters" are the absolute best with no common system disk (there is a
> quorum disk) and multiple copies of everything often built by different
> people.
>
> Cheers Richard Maher

VMS and its administrators have mostly managed these situations
reasonably well without needing a "standard server build", though in
many circumstances a "standard server build" (and other vaguely-
related conventions for things such as account names, device names,
maybe even IP addresses, etc) may have operational benefits,
regardless of what particular OS is in use.

On the other hand, the inflexible application of unnecessary policies
relating to "standard builds" can cause more hassle for the
organisation as a whole than it saves for the IT department. Just ask
any IT department whose "standard build" policy starts with "Choose
the appropriate Dell hardware", especially if the policy then stops
very shortly afterwards.

"Do it right, do it once". You know it makes sense. Sadly, the
certified Windows dependent world hasn't caught on yet (perhaps
because there's much more money changing hands if everything has to be
"upgraded" every few years, whether or not there is any actual benefit
outside the IT department).