Re: MS SQL Serveror ORACLE?

I agree. SQL Server works great for lower end (in terms of size and complexity)databases that are not very complicated. At the lower end it is definitely faster than Oracle but as the size and complexity increases it becomes painfully slow and difficult to manage with all its crashes, bugs and what not. I read an analogy somewhere comparing Oracle and MS SQL Server - A sixteen wheeler vs a pickup truck, each has its own use and place.
Regards
Venkat

John Spackman wrote in message <6edr5s$701$1_at_plug.news.pipex.net>...
>We too are fed up with MS SQL crashing and nuking our database almost every
>week. We have a 10Gb database, one table has >85million rows. If you
>hammer the server then it simply starts reading and writing the wrong pages
>on the disk and you end up with a corrupt database. The solution is to
>spend three days with the users staring at the ceiling while you transfer
>row by row into a new database and recreate the indecies. MS admit they
>have problems with large table support. Oracle 8 eval arrives Monday am,
>porting starts immediately.
>
>Oh and the query optimiser is a joke too. We have some big queries, and on
>one day a query will fly, the next day it crawls like a dog, even if
 nothing
>has changed. The solution is to tear the queries up into temporary tables,
>work out and enforce a good query plan.
>
>I hate it I hate it I hate it (and now it's personal!)
Received on Sun Mar 15 1998 - 00:00:00 CST