Re: Online database....how?

Why do you like SQL Server? I hear what you're saying about NT vs *nux. I am curious as to why you'd be keen on a port of SQL Server to *nix. Didn't SQL Server begin life at Sybase before being ported onto Winblows?

Wouldn't it be better to go with a dbms that is more open - able to run on NT as well as *nix? There would have to be *significant* benefits to warrant locking oneself into a M$ offering, imho.

Ditto re: Access.

Regards,
Mike.

I agree about AIn article <z1vL5.11883
$G95.4027671_at_typhoon.southeast.rr.com>,
  "atl.mediaone" <rmycroft_at_mediaone.net> wrote:
> Hmmm, so this is a plus only running on Winders? Having right now a
> position where I'm running several boxes remotely (at least most of
 the
> time) that are at the moment running NT - and no I'm not going to
 hand out
> the URL so all the hackers can test all those marvelous
 security 'features'
> of NT - and I'll tell you point blank I'd like nothing better than to
 get
> the h__l off of NT. It is very much a pain in the rear trying to do
 remote
> admin activities with it. And God bless those idiots from Redmond for
> including that stupid registry idea. With Linux or any version of
 UNIX I've
> met you tend to have config files - 99% of the time ASCII format -
 that by
> God you can edit and then ftp to your server and restart the needed
 daemon.
> No need for the magic of reboot every damn time you change
 something. I've
> run web sites with a mix of OS'es and the machines that gave us the
 most
> grief were the blasted NT boxes. The Linux boxes never, and I mean
 never,
> crashed on software errors. And even though I happen to like SQL
 Server in
> general, been with it since 4.21, just because it is not available on
> anything but NT it's going to get the boot. and yes, I do indeed
 have the
> authority to make that happen and it will. I'm actually hoping that
 MS gets
> broken up precisely so the possibility of SQL Server getting ported
 to UNIX
> becomes more likely than hell freezing over.
>
> I won't even begin to get into 'our favorite database, Access' - if
 that's
> your top pick then you're no dba.
>
> Rich Mycroft
>
> Larry Linson wrote in message <8tl18b$fjn$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>...
> > doug_at_modsoft.com (Doug Dumitru) wrote:
> >
> > > The only production hosting service in the mvDBMS market that I am
> > > aware of is my company (EasyCo). We support five different mvDBMS
> > > databases on x86 Linux hardware with datacenters on both coasts.
 We
> > > support mvDBMS applications with user access either via the web or
> > > via terminal streams (TELNET) over the internet. All systems are
> > > securely hosted and included management of backups and other
 system
> > > monitoring functions.
> >
> >I'm not sure what "mvDBMS" means, but there are a plethora of host
> >sites that support users' database needs, some of them actually
 running
> >NT hosts so we can use our favorite database, Microsoft Access, or
 our
> >favorite server database, MS SQL Server, which no matter how many
> >databases you support, don't run under Unix.
> >
> >--
> > L. M. (Larry) Linson
> > http://www.ntpcug.org - North Texas PC User Group - Visit and Join
> > http://www.ntmsdevsigs.homestead.com - NTPCUG Developer SIGs
> > http://homestead.deja.com/user.accdevel - Access examples
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
>
>

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Wed Nov 01 2000 - 06:29:18 CST