You didn't read the small print. They had an ad in the WSJ saying they'd give a cool million if you could prove that MS-SQL ran faster... blah blah blah, the catch was that you had to install Oracle 8i with a whack load of services offered by Oracle... driving the price up WAY above the million they would give you anyway... it was just a cheap marketing ploy to say "buy 3 million dollars worth of software and we'll give you 1/3rd off".
Larry's pissed that SQL 7.0 is outperforming his cash cow. he has no alternative revenue stream.
Actually, as SA I could log into your data server and run syscmd which would allow me to run DOS-level commands. (which means I could ftp files to your server and run them, etc. format your drive, delete your files).. yes, this could be potently dangerous.
Right on the money with this post.
ALL database installations by default have a "set" password for the admin account. If you didn't know what it was to start with, how are you going to log in and configure your database? ANYBODY installing a database server package should know this as a matter of common knowledge mixed with industry experience.
The "urgency" over this matter is over-inflated at best. Any experienced database admin would have a flaky clue about the admin rights and password situation... If they don't change it, its either to
a) ignorance
b) stupidity
c) laziness
Either way, do you want that person in charge of your database/web server?
Also, if you're worried about securing your data, WHY on earth would you host your data server on the same box as your web server? This just seems like a cardinal sin waiting to be exploited.
Regardless, this "problem" isn't the result of poorly designed software, but rather, end-users who are dabbling without the necessary experience/training. Any business who is contemplating using a database over the internet had better realize that they need to hire a professional to do the job properly (whether in house or not is to their discretion). Your data is worth as much as it means towards the survival of your business, do you want to leave that in the hands of a bumbling idiot who's never done this sort of thing before? I don't think so.
I'm done ranting.
Maybe what we should do is have an independent test. Linux Journal vs. PCMagazine. Both get the same hardware. Each configures as they see fit their appropriate OS, and then they face off with the same test parameters against each other. Feel free to even make those parameters known beforehand. This is the only way to ever really settle this debate.
If you're rebooting nightly, then you should take a look at your hardware, NOT the OS. I've been running W2K Server for 2 months without a reboot. NT 4.0? I can run the server at least a month without being forced to reboot. If you're installing a lot of crap on your machine (aka shareware, etc) expect it to go down. It's not the OS in question, but rather what you do with it.
Slashdot Mirror
high score: 76 seconds on Expert. I have too much time on my hands though.
You didn't read the small print. They had an ad in the WSJ saying they'd give a cool million if you could prove that MS-SQL ran faster... blah blah blah, the catch was that you had to install Oracle 8i with a whack load of services offered by Oracle... driving the price up WAY above the million they would give you anyway... it was just a cheap marketing ploy to say "buy 3 million dollars worth of software and we'll give you 1/3rd off". Larry's pissed that SQL 7.0 is outperforming his cash cow. he has no alternative revenue stream.
Actually, as SA I could log into your data server and run syscmd which would allow me to run DOS-level commands. (which means I could ftp files to your server and run them, etc. format your drive, delete your files).. yes, this could be potently dangerous.
Right on the money with this post. ALL database installations by default have a "set" password for the admin account. If you didn't know what it was to start with, how are you going to log in and configure your database? ANYBODY installing a database server package should know this as a matter of common knowledge mixed with industry experience. The "urgency" over this matter is over-inflated at best. Any experienced database admin would have a flaky clue about the admin rights and password situation... If they don't change it, its either to a) ignorance b) stupidity c) laziness Either way, do you want that person in charge of your database/web server? Also, if you're worried about securing your data, WHY on earth would you host your data server on the same box as your web server? This just seems like a cardinal sin waiting to be exploited. Regardless, this "problem" isn't the result of poorly designed software, but rather, end-users who are dabbling without the necessary experience/training. Any business who is contemplating using a database over the internet had better realize that they need to hire a professional to do the job properly (whether in house or not is to their discretion). Your data is worth as much as it means towards the survival of your business, do you want to leave that in the hands of a bumbling idiot who's never done this sort of thing before? I don't think so. I'm done ranting.
Maybe what we should do is have an independent test. Linux Journal vs. PCMagazine. Both get the same hardware. Each configures as they see fit their appropriate OS, and then they face off with the same test parameters against each other. Feel free to even make those parameters known beforehand. This is the only way to ever really settle this debate.
If you're rebooting nightly, then you should take a look at your hardware, NOT the OS. I've been running W2K Server for 2 months without a reboot. NT 4.0? I can run the server at least a month without being forced to reboot. If you're installing a lot of crap on your machine (aka shareware, etc) expect it to go down. It's not the OS in question, but rather what you do with it.