Re: Microsoft destroys TPC-C records!

In article <38E04050.A784203E_at_msgto.com>, Malcontent <malcontent_at_msgto.com> wrote:
> >
> > and not just the 2000 figures. I can see your points but I really
> > think MS will slowly make its way into the enterprise as people
 start
> > seeing the successes they have with thier smaller databases. SQL 7.0
> > can be looked at like Oracle 8. Quite a bit of change and quite a
 few
> >
>
> I would guess that you are probably right. *some* people will look at
 the
> success they have had with small databases and try SQL server with
 large
> data bases. I have no real sympathy for them however. Obviously these
 people
> do not know how to evaluate their needs. It's like buying a suzuki car
> because they make nice motorcycle. Better to compare suziki cars to
 toyotas
> and suzuki motorcyles to yamahas. Anybody who is not bright enough to
 an
> analysis of their needs and the possible products that can fullfill
 them is
> just asking for it.
>
>

I cannot belive the bias that everyone has. Has anyone actually run SQL Server 7.0? Even if you did you may not know the proper tuning since most Oracle/Informix/Sybase DBA's are used to tuning UNIX and their own DBMS. I couldnt just install Informix and run it for a month and since I didnt have it tuned right dismiss it as a piece of shit. I have been a Sybase DBA, Oracle DBA, and SQL Server DBA. SQL Server is the easiest to admin and provides a ton of functionality without an extra cost. Is it as scalable as Oracle? No. Will it be? More than likely although it will be bound to NT. Will it ever have the equiv of OPS? Probably not. Are there very large OLTP and OLAP databases (1TB+) running SQL Server? Yes. Is it suitable for 24x7? Yes. Would I run an ERP for a fortune 100 company on it? No. Would I run a several hundred GB OLTP DB on it? Yes. Would I do up to 1TB OLAP on it? Yes. Just because there are horror stories with people doing bad implementaions doesnt mean that a correct implementation will not work. It does. I could dig up near the same number of Oracle projects that didnt work due to bad design/architecture. I do not think Oracle is a bad product. I think it is a better product overall. SQL Server does everything most people need at a smaller cost and can provide the needed performance for a lower overall price. It is also written very well for canned applications. It can self tune to give about 70% of max acheivable performance. So Db's up to 20GB or so will probably work quite well without a DBA if written and setup properly. Anyway enough said you guys can think what you want but really you are only doing some MS bashing. Sure they deserve some for some products but other products really arent that bad.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Tue Mar 28 2000 - 00:00:00 CST