Re: Anyone working on better transaction locking?

"Jan Wieck" <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3E956DD8.29432405@Yahoo.com...
> Ron Peacetree wrote:
> > "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote in message
> > > [...]
> > > If you want us to accept such a blanket statement
> > > as fact, you'd better back it up with evidence.  Let's
> > > see some test cases.
> > Soon as I have the HW and SW to do so, it'll happen.
> > I have some "bet the company" decisions to make.
>
> And you are comparing what? Just pure features and/or
> performance, or total cost of ownership for your
> particular case?
>
Technical Analysis and Business Analysis are two separate, and equally
necessary, activities.  However, before one can accurately measure
things like Total Cost of Ownership, one needs to have accurately and
sufficiently characterized what will be owned and one's choices as to
what could be owned...


> It is a common misunderstanding open source would be
> free software. It is not because since the software comes
> as is, without any warranty and it's usually hard to get
> support provided or backed by large companies, it is safe
> to build you own support team (depends on how much
> you "bet the company"). Replacing license fees and
> support contracts with payroll entries plus taking the
> feature and performance differences into account  makes
> this comparision a very individual, non-portable task.
>
Very valid points, and I was a supporter of the FSF and the LPF when
Usenet was "the net" and backbone nodes communicated by modem, so I've
been wrestling with people's sometimes misappropriate
use/understanding of the operator "free" for some time.

However, a correctly done Technical Analysis =should= be reasonably
portable since among other things you don't want to have to start all
over if your company's business or business model changes.  Clearly
Business Analysis is very context dependant.

It should also be noted that given the prices of some of the solutions
out there, there are many companies who's choices are constrained, but
still need to stay in business...


> Unfortunately most manager type people can produce an
> annoyingly high volume of questions and suggestions as
> long as they need more input, then all of the sudden
> disappear when they made their decision.
>
Word.  Although the phrase "manager type people" could be replaced
with "people" and the above would still be true IMHO.  Thankfully,
most of my bosses are people who have worked their up from the
technical trenches, so the conversation at least rates to be focused
and reasonable while it's occurring...