When I was a grasshopper Master Po told me : 'A fool with a tool is still a fool'. As others have pointed out Oracle is a high-end product. You really have to read the documentation, once you understand the basic concepts of oracle there are a lot of tools available. Allmost all tasks are command-line based. A lot of different GUI applications are available to assist you. Oracle's main tools are Enterprise Manager and SQL Developer. Server side you have a few tools you can use: Database Configuration Assitant, Network Configuration Assistent, Migration Assistent, etc. Choose the one you like for a sprecific task. Bottom line is : it's not a point and click application.
另一方面，大多数抱怨 Oracle 可用性的人都试图在完全不同的环境中安装和运行 Oracle。例如，如果您是一名开发人员，想要在本地笔记本电脑上运行 Oracle 以便安装完整的堆栈，那么您将不需要或不想要这些重量级工具之一。这些人最终将使用 Oracle 默认安装的任何工具。传统上，这些工具不太理想。 Oracle 通过提供轻量级 Enterprise Manager Web 客户端以及对于这些类型的安装非常有用的数据库，在这方面做得更好。但要确保企业管理器 Web 客户端在开发人员安装的 Windows 笔记本电脑上完美运行，仍然可能有些困难，这导致相当多的开发人员得出“Oracle 很糟糕”的结论。
If you're deploying Oracle in a large corporate environment, there is an ecosystem of user-friendly tools to administer the database. But most of those tools are relatively painful to install-- they need their own database, for example, and install components on the database server along with the central repository. It makes perfect sense to invest in this sort of heavy-weight infrastructure when you're spending 6 or 7 figures on Oracle database licenses and you need to handle things like continuous monitoring and alerting.
On the other hand, most of the folks that are complaining about Oracle usability are trying to install and run Oracle in a much different environment. If you're a developer, for example, that wants to run Oracle on your local laptop so that you have the full stack installed, you're not going to need or want one of these heavyweight tools. Those folks are going to end up with whatever tools Oracle installs by default. Traditionally, those tools have been somewhat less than ideal. Oracle is getting better about that by shipping a lightweight Enterprise Manager web client with the database that is very useful for these types of installs. But it can still be a bit of a fight to ensure that the Enterprise Manager web client works perfectly on a developer's Windows laptop install which leads a non-trivial number of developers to conclude that "Oracle sucks".
You have noticed that you are pointing to a four-year-old rant right? By a supposed DBA who didn't even know enough to turn off unneeded services in order to shorten up the load time?
I'm sorry, but if the complaint is "why can't this industrial-strength DB be managed as easy as this lightweight, feature-poor, freeware?" then I think it is a self-answering question.
To answer the rest, yes there are tools out there. To specifically answer your " I mean, people who work on Oracle work for companies with big budgets, so surely they could afford a license for a fancy "sit tight and enjoy the ride Oracle admin studio" of some sort to help developers do some stuff by themselves without pestering the DBA? " , this is more often a factor of a DBA choosing to lock down privileges - not a function of the database itself. A tool is no use to a developer if their user account is not granted the rights to do what they want.
Rants like that one? Looks like someone tasked with running an app they had no interest in actually learning much about. No wonder they got frustrated. Yes, sometimes Oracle causes frustration of its own, but many of these rants are from people who probably picked a database platform far above their needs, and are disinclined to really learn how to manage it.
Quest Software has a variety of tools, primarily TOAD but also Spotlight and there is a backup monitoring tool in beta, for database admin.
Part of the issue is that Oracle runs on a variety of platforms, such as Solaris, Linux and Windows. The larger (and therefore more complex) installs have been on more exotic hardware. A 'full stack' admin tool would really have to be native to the database platform, and that just hasn't been practical. That's one reason why the OEM stuff is built as a web-app, and why SQL*Plus, the standard client, has stuck as a command line tool. As has RMAN, the backup/recovery manager.
Another issue is that there is a lot of baggage in Oracle. Rather than a simple "Database = File" or "Table = File" model, Oracle needed to cope with data volumes too big for single files. So they have a concept of a tablespace which maps database objects to data files. That's not so much an issue with modern filesystems.
Finally, Oracle is a high-end product. You use it in situations where the cheaper alternatives can't cut it. So it is often applied in more complex environments which would require more admin anyway. In that way, it is more a case that with Oracle, you can admin your way out of situations which impossible for a competitor product.
从没有专门的开发 DBA（或真正了解开发的生产 DBA）资源的小型开发商店的角度来看，Oracle 的生产力低于 SQL Server 或 MySQL。
There are tools for Oracle, both built-in and third-party.
I think that the tools for SQL Server are a lot easier to use. And third party tools for SQL Server (i.e. Red Gate) are also extremely easy to use and powerful (compared to Toad, which has a byzantine and complex user interface)
Oracle is a multi-platform database and it dates from the original RDBMS implementations generation (one of the first which competed to replace older systems), so it has a lot of layers at install which can be very challenging to deal with. PL/SQL is also more difficult for development compared to SQL Server, MySQL or DB/2 in many ways.
From the point of view of small development shops without dedicated development DBA (or a production DBA who actually understands development) resources, Oracle is less productive than SQL Server or MySQL.
For DBA management and monitoring there's Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control. Not an IDE, purely an enterprise-wide administration tool for all of the databases in an organization. Everything from backups to performance monitoring, job creation, alerts, and so forth.
发布评论
评论（8）
当我还是一只蚱蜢的时候，波大师就告诉我：“傻瓜有了工具，仍然是傻瓜”。正如其他人指出的那样，Oracle 是一款高端产品。你真的必须阅读文档，一旦你了解了 oracle 的基本概念，就有很多可用的工具。几乎所有任务都是基于命令行的。许多不同的 GUI 应用程序可以为您提供帮助。 Oracle的主要工具是Enterprise Manager和SQL Developer。在服务器端，您可以使用一些工具：数据库配置助手、网络配置助手、迁移助手等。选择您喜欢的工具来完成特定任务。底线是：它不是点击式应用程序。
When I was a grasshopper Master Po told me : 'A fool with a tool is still a fool'. As others have pointed out Oracle is a high-end product. You really have to read the documentation, once you understand the basic concepts of oracle there are a lot of tools available. Allmost all tasks are command-line based. A lot of different GUI applications are available to assist you. Oracle's main tools are Enterprise Manager and SQL Developer. Server side you have a few tools you can use: Database Configuration Assitant, Network Configuration Assistent, Migration Assistent, etc. Choose the one you like for a sprecific task. Bottom line is : it's not a point and click application.
如果您在大型企业环境中部署 Oracle，则可以使用用户友好的工具生态系统来管理数据库。但大多数这些工具安装起来都相对困难——例如，它们需要自己的数据库，并将组件与中央存储库一起安装在数据库服务器上。当您在 Oracle 数据库许可证上花费 6 或 7 位数并且需要处理诸如持续监控和警报之类的事情时，投资这种重量级基础设施是非常有意义的。
另一方面，大多数抱怨 Oracle 可用性的人都试图在完全不同的环境中安装和运行 Oracle。例如，如果您是一名开发人员，想要在本地笔记本电脑上运行 Oracle 以便安装完整的堆栈，那么您将不需要或不想要这些重量级工具之一。这些人最终将使用 Oracle 默认安装的任何工具。传统上，这些工具不太理想。 Oracle 通过提供轻量级 Enterprise Manager Web 客户端以及对于这些类型的安装非常有用的数据库，在这方面做得更好。但要确保企业管理器 Web 客户端在开发人员安装的 Windows 笔记本电脑上完美运行，仍然可能有些困难，这导致相当多的开发人员得出“Oracle 很糟糕”的结论。
If you're deploying Oracle in a large corporate environment, there is an ecosystem of user-friendly tools to administer the database. But most of those tools are relatively painful to install-- they need their own database, for example, and install components on the database server along with the central repository. It makes perfect sense to invest in this sort of heavy-weight infrastructure when you're spending 6 or 7 figures on Oracle database licenses and you need to handle things like continuous monitoring and alerting.
On the other hand, most of the folks that are complaining about Oracle usability are trying to install and run Oracle in a much different environment. If you're a developer, for example, that wants to run Oracle on your local laptop so that you have the full stack installed, you're not going to need or want one of these heavyweight tools. Those folks are going to end up with whatever tools Oracle installs by default. Traditionally, those tools have been somewhat less than ideal. Oracle is getting better about that by shipping a lightweight Enterprise Manager web client with the database that is very useful for these types of installs. But it can still be a bit of a fight to ensure that the Enterprise Manager web client works perfectly on a developer's Windows laptop install which leads a non-trivial number of developers to conclude that "Oracle sucks".
我使用一个名为 PL/SQL Developer 的应用程序，在我看来，它运行得很好。
I use an app called PL/SQL developer, and it works pretty well, IMO.
www.enterprise-elements.com 就是这样一个工具
www.enterprise-elements.com is one such tool
你注意到你指的是四岁孩子的咆哮吧？一个甚至不知道如何关闭不需要的服务以缩短加载时间的 DBA？
我很抱歉，但如果抱怨是“为什么这个工业级数据库不能像这个轻量级、功能匮乏的免费软件一样容易管理？”那么我认为这是一个自我回答的问题。
回答剩下的问题，是的，有工具。具体回答你的问题”我的意思是，从事 Oracle 工作的人都为拥有大量预算的公司工作，因此他们肯定可以负担得起某种花哨的“坐稳并享受 Oracle admin studio”的许可证，以帮助开发人员自己做一些事情而不困扰 DBA？”，这通常是 DBA 选择锁定权限的一个因素，而不是数据库本身的功能。如果开发人员的用户帐户没有被授予做他们想做的事情的权利，那么工具对开发人员来说就没用。
就这么胡言乱语吗？看起来有人负责运行一个他们实际上没有兴趣了解太多的应用程序。难怪他们会感到沮丧。是的，有时 Oracle 本身也会造成挫败感，但这些抱怨中的许多人可能选择了远远超出其需求的数据库平台，并且不愿意真正学习如何管理它。
You have noticed that you are pointing to a four-year-old rant right? By a supposed DBA who didn't even know enough to turn off unneeded services in order to shorten up the load time?
I'm sorry, but if the complaint is "why can't this industrial-strength DB be managed as easy as this lightweight, feature-poor, freeware?" then I think it is a self-answering question.
To answer the rest, yes there are tools out there. To specifically answer your " I mean, people who work on Oracle work for companies with big budgets, so surely they could afford a license for a fancy "sit tight and enjoy the ride Oracle admin studio" of some sort to help developers do some stuff by themselves without pestering the DBA? " , this is more often a factor of a DBA choosing to lock down privileges - not a function of the database itself. A tool is no use to a developer if their user account is not granted the rights to do what they want.
Rants like that one? Looks like someone tasked with running an app they had no interest in actually learning much about. No wonder they got frustrated. Yes, sometimes Oracle causes frustration of its own, but many of these rants are from people who probably picked a database platform far above their needs, and are disinclined to really learn how to manage it.
Quest Software 拥有多种工具，主要是 TOAD，还有 Spotlight，还有一个用于数据库管理的测试版备份监控工具。
部分问题在于 Oracle 在多种平台上运行，例如 Solaris、Linux 和 Windows。更大（因此更复杂）的安装是在更奇特的硬件上进行的。 “全栈”管理工具确实必须是数据库平台本机的，但这是不切实际的。这就是 OEM 的东西被构建为 Web 应用程序的原因之一，也是标准客户端 SQL*Plus 一直作为命令行工具的原因之一。与备份/恢复管理器 RMAN 一样。
另一个问题是Oracle有很多包袱。 Oracle 需要处理对于单个文件来说太大的数据量，而不是简单的“数据库 = 文件”或“表 = 文件”模型。因此他们有一个表空间的概念，它将数据库对象映射到数据文件。对于现代文件系统来说，这并不是什么大问题。
最后，Oracle是一个高端产品。您可以在更便宜的替代品无法解决问题的情况下使用它。因此它通常应用于更复杂的环境，无论如何都需要更多的管理。这样，更有可能的是，使用 Oracle，您可以摆脱竞争对手产品无法做到的情况。
Quest Software has a variety of tools, primarily TOAD but also Spotlight and there is a backup monitoring tool in beta, for database admin.
Part of the issue is that Oracle runs on a variety of platforms, such as Solaris, Linux and Windows. The larger (and therefore more complex) installs have been on more exotic hardware. A 'full stack' admin tool would really have to be native to the database platform, and that just hasn't been practical. That's one reason why the OEM stuff is built as a web-app, and why SQL*Plus, the standard client, has stuck as a command line tool. As has RMAN, the backup/recovery manager.
Another issue is that there is a lot of baggage in Oracle. Rather than a simple "Database = File" or "Table = File" model, Oracle needed to cope with data volumes too big for single files. So they have a concept of a tablespace which maps database objects to data files. That's not so much an issue with modern filesystems.
Finally, Oracle is a high-end product. You use it in situations where the cheaper alternatives can't cut it. So it is often applied in more complex environments which would require more admin anyway. In that way, it is more a case that with Oracle, you can admin your way out of situations which impossible for a competitor product.
Oracle 有内置工具和第三方工具。
我认为 SQL Server 的工具更容易使用。 SQL Server 的第三方工具（即 Red Gate）也非常易于使用且功能强大（与 Toad 相比，Toad 具有复杂的用户界面）
Oracle 是一个多平台数据库，它可以追溯到原始 RDBMS 实现一代（第一个竞争取代旧系统的系统之一），因此它在安装时有很多层，处理起来非常具有挑战性。与 SQL Server、MySQL 或 DB/2 相比，PL/SQL 在很多方面的开发难度也更大。
从没有专门的开发 DBA（或真正了解开发的生产 DBA）资源的小型开发商店的角度来看，Oracle 的生产力低于 SQL Server 或 MySQL。
There are tools for Oracle, both built-in and third-party.
I think that the tools for SQL Server are a lot easier to use. And third party tools for SQL Server (i.e. Red Gate) are also extremely easy to use and powerful (compared to Toad, which has a byzantine and complex user interface)
Oracle is a multi-platform database and it dates from the original RDBMS implementations generation (one of the first which competed to replace older systems), so it has a lot of layers at install which can be very challenging to deal with. PL/SQL is also more difficult for development compared to SQL Server, MySQL or DB/2 in many ways.
From the point of view of small development shops without dedicated development DBA (or a production DBA who actually understands development) resources, Oracle is less productive than SQL Server or MySQL.
对于 DBA 管理和监控，有 Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control 。不是 IDE，纯粹是用于组织中所有数据库的企业范围管理工具。从备份到性能监控、就业创造、警报等一切。
For DBA management and monitoring there's Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control. Not an IDE, purely an enterprise-wide administration tool for all of the databases in an organization. Everything from backups to performance monitoring, job creation, alerts, and so forth.