Re: Sybase vs Oracle - which is better?

Hi,
I've always hated these "my dad can beat your dad" talks, but I find your reply very interesting. To introduce myself, I've worked with Oracle databases for more than 11 years, but I try to keep up-to-date with what happens in the rest of the database world too, so words from experts from other venders are greatly appreachiated. Thanks.

I do find some of your claims to be wrong though ...

kennedyleigh_at_yahoo.com wrote in message <72rn7e$fpb$1_at_nnrp1.dejanews.com>...

>> + Oracle comes standard with many utilities, whereas Sybase doesn't
>
>It doesn't have anymore functionality though - sybase far fewer, more
 powerful
>toos (ie: Sybase Central).

Hmm .. I don't know what Sybase Central is - but if it's like Enterprise manager, that's part of the standard client tools for Oracle. Enterprise manager is a tool targeted for DBAs to manage large and distributed databases, but it can be used by developers to gain overview of a local database too. It allows you to control (from starting and stopping the database) all databases in the enterprise, including oversea databases. It has an internal script language, that makes it possible for you to write generic scripts to backup on different platforms (if you dare go there) and has "watchdog" features to alert about settings passing limits you set. In essence, you have one tool to manage the database.

From the name "Sybase Central" it seems we are talking about some of the same functionality?

>> + Row level locking been for years in Oracle, only recently in
>> Sybase.
>True, but only badly written apprications (ie: cursors) need row level
 locking
>anyway.

Huh?? BADLY WRITTEN applications use cursors? According to my RDBMS teorectically knowledge, even C.J. Date refers to Cursors as the only access you have doing SQL. Internally every SQL you do (at least in Oracle) is done by a cursor. Using the cursor command only differenciates between implicit and explicit cursors. Using host languages as Cobol or C, I need to use cursors to access data too.

But using cursors does not mean I cannot access data in bulks - but that's another storry.

>> + Oracle can select data from another database on another server
>> (dblink) Can Sybase?
>
>Oracle cannot support more that one database in a server, where as Sybase
 can
>support more that you would ever need. It also supports the ability to
>select from another database, and that database doesn't have to be a Sybase
>database !

PLEASE ...
"Oracle cannot support more than one database in a server" ??? Where did you get that statement from? Any server (one machine) can run as many instances of databases as you have memory and CPU power to run. I've seen very FEW installations with only ONE instance per box.

DBLINKs are NOT only provided to connect you to an Oracle Database. By installing drivers for forinstance DB2, you can use DBLINKS (same syntax, no programming changes) to connect your Oracle and DB2 databases together (this is called Open Interface - Oracle Gateway). These products are NOT part of the standard Oracle Package though, and you need to buy that part seperately. But your statement is simply not true. Another issue is, that the gateway might not work as effective as you want to depending on which platforms you tie together. Hence, when you tie an non relational database to Oracle, you get some response and compability problems (of course), but you are actually able to connect your relational Oracle database to a networked Codasyl database.

>Oracle does have some good points, but it also has some very weak ones.

Agree! Oracle was one of the last vendors to implement constraints. However, the implementation they made seems to me, superior to anything I've seen elsewhere?? (I'll like to swap knowledge on this part).

One thing that I always find talking to Oracle's advantage is it's scalability. You can start your database on a local palmtop, and migrate it all to a 1TB database on a distributed unix installation without even changing one line of code. I know of no other database vendor who has this ability? The flexibility also allows smaller systems to be integrated with the larger, hence allowing traveling sales people to upload their palmtop databases to Oracle - by just using the internal replication manager software (Portable agents). What is Sybase doing in this field?

>I would say that the killer function oracle has, which sybase doesn't is
 the
>parrallel server. If you need to run a single server over multiple
 machines,
>oracle is a better choice. If not, sybase is problably more suitable to
 most
>people.

Hmm .. that's how you define "suitable" :)) But Sybase do have some advantages - however choosing a database must not be done by looking at todays technology but tomorrows. Everyone knows about Larry Ellions vision about networked computing - what role does Sybase have in a world based on thin clients? When the silence comes over the screaming match between Bill Gates and Larry Ellioson I'll like to hear the visions from the other vendors out there. Do they share or agree with either of the above CEO's or do they have their own vision (niche) they are following?

>The main reason Oracle does so well is that many Packages (eg: SAP,
>Peoplesoft) are badly written cobol apps which use cursors for everything.
>Sybase had a religous was with SAP over row level locking and oracle got
 very
>rich because of it.

Hehe - sounds interesting. I cannot image accessing data in BLOCK mode when it comes to transactional based systems. Datawarehousing is another matter - but SAP is not a datawarehouse.

• Peter Larsen