Re: MS SQL vs. ORACLE

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 12/15/1999, 12:38:05, "kevin moriarty" <schmerd_at_primenet.com> wrote =

regarding Re: MS SQL vs. ORACLE:

You realize that asking this question on this forum brings you inevitable answer: Oracle is better.
But, on the other hand, it is my honest opinion - I have experience with Sybase, MS SQL server and Oracle. My choice is Oracle and I never =

regret it.

> For a brand new user:
> Installation:
> MS SQL Server 7.0 install 1.5 hours
> Oracle 8.0.5 install 16 hours

I did not install Oracle 8.0.5, but 7.3 and 8i on NT installation is =

not even close to 16 hours. Actual Oracle installation depending on the machine you are using is well below 1 hour. These 16 hours tell me =

a story of a great hardware problem.. .

> ?Tools for a normal user? (development tools?)
> Sequel server: access,vb, visual interdev
> oracle: developer, jdeveloper, webdb

Can't you use the same tools for Oracle and MS SQL? I use Delphi for =

both...

> Time to learn (tuffy)
> sequel server:
> back end ( sql, tsql) 160 hours
> front end (vb: 400 hours, access: 100 hours, interdev: 100 hours)

> oracle:
> back end (sql, pl/sql) 160 hours
> front end (developer: ? 300 hours, jdeveloper: 160 hours, webdb 60 =

hours)
I would say that PL/SQL is a bit more complex and powerful then TSQL, =

and VB as a development tool is not in the same category with Jdeveloper (I do not want to start this discussion, this is just my view). Java in Oracle is a big one. It will make a difference for your =

learning curve and development results if you want to use Java capabilities of Oracle 8i.

> long term skill aquisition for oracle is x5 timewise
Oracle needs you to know more, then MS , but, again, it gives more back if you use it right. Though, it is not x5 for sure.
> development time for oracle is x3

It depends on your definition of 'development'. Some 'fast' development requires long re-writes later. If you know what you doing then development time is at worth the same =

for both, with strong tendency to be shorter on Oracle - Oracle is more sophisticated then MS SQL.

> my experience is: oracle support and documentation leaves much to be
> desired.

My experience - Oracle tech support is the best in the industry, at least their server support. They deserve my best reference - they saved my back couple of times with a very good advice in a very bad situations :-). So, you can depend on them for sure. The documentation is much better then MS's. I could never feel comfortable with MS way to organize documents, but again your view depends on what you use to..

> everyone and their uncle knows something about sql server

Other side of it - I have seen much more poor designed databases of MS =

SQL then on Oracle. In my practice on average (nothing personal guys!) =

people working with Oracle are more professional then MS SQL developers.

Scalability of MS SQL, as you know, is limited with operating system =

and Intel processor. Security of it depends on OS as well. There are =

lot of discussions on NT security issues, see by yourself. I would sleep better having a big database (OLTP or DW, regardless) on =

Unix, especially if you you are planning some inra/internet development which all we are.

Anyway, good luck with your project, hope I being helpful.

--
Dimitri Baranovsky,
Datasource Information Technologies LTD. eMail: db_at_datasource.ca
web : www.datasource.ca Received on Thu Dec 16 1999 - 12:59:47 CST