Re: oracle is better?

Some experience with both (Oracle 7/8 and MS-SQL 6.x/7):

Oracle comes with a programming language. What MS-SQL server comes with is pathetic.

MS-SQL 6.5, 7 on NT: tried to load the USPS ZIP4 database (36.7 million rows).
SQL Server barfed (bigtime) at 32Million. Runs fine on Oracle 8 on NT.

Oracle is barely compatible with anything not from Oracle.

MS-SQL server is quite compatible with everything (since they basically control what's out there...heh heh)

MS-SQL Server is orders of magnitude easier to support.

ODBC drivers for MS-SQL server work very well (not so with Oracle)

Where individual tables contain under, say, a couple million rows, MS-SQL server is very speedy
and a bargain for the price, particularly if you want to connect to a web server (IIS).

If you want to get big (I mean very big), you can't do it with MS-SQL.

If It's your money, MS-SQL "gurus" are cheaper than Oracle "gurus"

I would not consider MS-SQL for any type of warehouse / datamart where volumes are involed.

MS-SQL is a super low-end transaction-based db.

Neither company has very good support.

Oracle's documentation is better than excellent.

Oracle's web product is weak (compared to IIS)

ZUSCH <zusch_at_aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991110152512.11284.00003309_at_ng-fa1.aol.com...
> My company is in a quandry between Oracle + SQL Server 7. Our main fear
is
> that SQL will not be able to hold the amount of data we wish to store
(all-text
> records, an upwards of 500,000 rows) Also, can anyone explain why Oracle
is SO
> MUCH more expensive than SQL? Microsofts answer was that it is "their
> mentality to want the small business to have access to this technology).
Can
> anyone comment to the contrary? Please o please. reply to:
> kmorris_at_goplanet.com
Received on Tue Nov 16 1999 - 16:45:48 CST