SQL Server/Oracle performance metrics

After reading many postings regarding SQL Server vs Oracle, most of which seem to degenerate into diatribes, I am still looking for some hard numbers or experienced opinions from reliable sources. I am trying to select a database architecture that will meet a client's needs at the best price. Most of the postings in these groups are strongly in favor of one solution over the other, for what seems "religous" reasons. Well, I'm an agnostic and I'm trying to solve my client's business problem. Assume the following:

• A multi-processor server (running NT, at least 512MB RAM) for the database
• Another server running the web/application server
• Potential traffic spikes of up to 1 million web site visitors over about 10 hours
• MS Site Server is expected as part of the architecture, so integration is an issue

My questions:
1. Can SQL Server handle this load reasonably well? 2. At what point (#users, #transactions/minute, etc.) is Oracle required?

Microsoft of course says SQL Server can handle anything, and the Transaction Processing Council (TPC) has some pretty good numbers to back up SQL Server's price/performance. My gut feel based on the research I have done so far is that SQL Server and Oracle **on the NT platform** are not that far apart, so the cost/integration benefits would lean towards SQL Server. If the load on the database reaches a certain point (and I don't really know what that is) the logical choice would be a UNIX solution.

Any constructive feedback would be appreciated.

• Gavin

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Tue Jan 18 2000 - 08:33:50 CST