Re: Opinions Wanted on Oracle for NT

On Thu, 01 May 1997 21:43:44 -0400, Ed Jennings <jenningse_at_mindspring.com> wrote:

Some thoughts on your questions from a recent bechmark I was invloved comparing oracle running under NT 3.51 and Sequent. The database was a data-mart of about 60Gb, with only a couple of concurrent users.
>
>Should I move to squash this now and insist on a unix database?
>

Performance was was dissimilar, and in the short time-scales of the test no problems were encountered.

However, loading the data was **very difficult**.

Most of the difficulties were concerned with the practicality of large sets of data on NT:

  With no head, tail,wc grep etc it was difficult to check files.(we had perl, but it takes a lot longer to write perl scripts to do same as above)

  Without compress files had to be left uncompressed. (there are lots of commpression utilities available, but noe came with NT that could compress the data 'in place')

  SQLLoader had to be run from the console. (I know it can be run c/s, but this would have meant 50Gb of data wandering about the LAN).

  We would have liked to used named pipes to uncompress a compressed export file and directly import it into oracle without realising the interim full-size file, but we could find no way of doing that on NT.

  We would also have liked to kick-off several sqlloader jobs in parallel as we did on the Sequent, but writing the PERL necessary to do this was beyond us.

There are certainly lots of products out there that probably sort out these problems, but if you wish support from a single vendor for all the tools that you would require to manage a large database then microsoft is not the place to go. Received on Sat May 10 1997 - 00:00:00 CDT