Re: Does anyone have serious databases on NT?

Yes I have an 8 GB Sybase ASE 11.5.1 database running on a Compaq Proliant 5500 4 way 2GB memory raid array 3200 it's been running on NT since February. We have rebooted the NT Server once, and recycle the Database server only when required usually for configuration changes.

Klinton Lee wrote:

> mkx_at_excite.com writes:
>
> >After reading many, many articles, press releases, and marketing
> >propaganda about the fight for the dominant position on NT, I seem to
> >see something missing: Any direct evidence that anyone is using the
> >major databases on NT (other than Microsoft's SQL Server). Most
> >serious (non-mainframe) projects always seem to go on Unix, AS/400,
> >etc. I understand why this is - many organizations are hesitant to go
> >"Enterprise on NT".
>
> >All of the statistics I have seen wrap the UNIX/NT market segments
> >together. Thus the "leader in license revenue" may have gotten there
> >on UNIX, without selling that much on NT.
>
> >I simply am interested in seeing where the major work is being done on
> >NT specifically, and if it is done elsewhere than MS SQL.
>
> I agree with Chris' comments below.
>
> I've been 'fortunate' to have to opportunity to maintain a variety of databases
> on NT: (Sybase, Oracle, DB2, Informix, MS SQL). The systems are nice for quick,
> 'development', but if it's a critical production system, I would stray away from
> NT.
>
> I know some shops use NT for their production systems on small, simple databases.
> All of our production level databases reside on Unix...All of our NT databases
> are 'crash and burn', (test databases).
>
> Klint
>
> On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Chris Weiss wrote:
>
> > A recent poll on the Team DBA web site showed that over 70% of the
> > respondents where using Oracle on NT. However, the overwhelming majority of
> > those who said that had not used Oracle on NT claimed they would never do
> > so.
> >
> > I maintain databases on both NT and Unix, and the difference is scale. Big
> > databases go on Unix. Small to medium databases go on NT. Unix (Solaris)
> > is significantly more stable, but the hardware is more expensive and the
> > personnel needed to administer these databases or servers command higher
> > salaries. NT is cheaper!!!!!! The Oracle claims concerning a lower cost of
> > ownership are misleading because these assume large databases in a
> > distributed environment. For the **majority** of databases (< 4GB and < 50
> > users), NT is the best choice for both cost and ease of management.
> >
> > Contrary to what many people say, Oracle on NT is by far the easiest to set
> > up, maintain, and monitor. Oracle on NT seems to run best from my experience
> > using service pack 5 and service pack 3.
> >
>
> .....
> .....
> .....
> .....
> .....
> .....
>
> >
> > Christopher Weiss
> > Professional Services Division
> > Compuware Corporation
> >
> >
Received on Tue Aug 03 1999 - 08:32:16 CDT