Re: Oracle VS MS SQL

I can offer our experience - we use SQL and databases in the few GB size range. Our interface is Access and or VB. There is no problem at all with stability in this size - assuming of course you have installed and the service packs. Performance is, in my view, primarily driven by the application programmers skill level. In our application we do lots of math on lots of records and performance is acceptable.

The reason I'm looking at this forum is because we do packaged stuff and a lot of the market uses Oracle so we are looking at the problems of doing both back ends - not to bash either SQL or Oracle.

Good luck - your application is pretty small on the data size so it should be fairly quick

Christian Sander Rosnes <christian.rosnes_at_link.nolink.no> wrote in article <72pgdn$mg1_at_grandma.link.no>...
> Hello!
>
> Our dept. is looking for a database solution for storage
> and retrieval of statistical and service related data
> for our telephone services.
>
> The choice is narrowed down to MS SQL or Oracle. I'm
> looking for comparisions between these two products;
> Hands-on experience is welcome.
>
> Plattform will be a PC (w/Raid) running Windows NT or
> Linux. (The latter rules out MS SQL, of course).
>
> The database should handle at least 2 GB of data.
> Performance must be high, because telephone applications
> will use the database for "real-time" information-
> retrieval.
> (We might have as many as 400 callers querying the
> database for unique records at same time. Search
> parameters will be indexed fields).
>
> Stability is also crucial. Our services are running
> 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year.
>
> The database server should also be accessible from
> the web, via perl scripts.
>
> MS SQL looks like the least expensive solution, but I'm a
> little worried with regards to performance and stability.
>
> I'm looking for comparisons regarding stability,
> performance and price.
>
> Any help is highly appreciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> # Christian Sander Rosnes
> # (To reply remove 'nolink' from email address)
>
>
Received on Fri Nov 20 1998 - 01:16:25 CST