Re: Difference Between Microsoft SQL and Oracle

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

> DA Morgan <damorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in
> news:3E287C42.3216D889_at_exesolutions.com:
>
> > los wrote:
> >
> >> What is the difference, in a nutshell between these two RDBMS's . Are
> >> they both for very large databases. Is Oracle more prevelant in the
> >> Corporate environment?
> >
> > At the risk of some flame-war imbecility.
> >
> > SQL Server is limited to a 32bit O/S so by definition can not be
> > scaled as large as Oracle.
>
> In the interest of gathering more data for myself, how many shops are
> running 64-bit? Unless you really are making use of the larger
> address space, there is a performance hit going with 64-bit. It's
> slight but it has to be outweighed by the need for a larger memory
> model.
>
> I figured that not many shops are running 64-bit and for that
> matter, that most shops are running 4p machines. That _used_ to be
> the conventional wisdom. Does it still hold?
> --
> Pablo Sanchez, High-Performance Database Engineering
> http://www.hpdbe.com

If you are running UNIX rather than Win95 there is a reason. If you have a 64bit O/S rather than a 32bit O/S there is a reason.

There are a lot of companies that take advantage of that address space. More than you might imagine.

Daniel Morgan Received on Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:55:52 CST