Re: Should I use Oracle 8 or SQL Server 7 on the Library System?

Trevor Fuson schrieb in Nachricht <7c4foi$8lf_at_bobs.unbc.ca>...
>I am the systems administrator for a University library. I am looking into
>moving the library system to a real DBMS. Does anyone know of an existing
>library based Oracle solution?
>
>Current Problem: (Summary: Too Slow and Unreliable)
>
>1. A query on the existing system takes 1 hour for every 400,000 records.
>(4/233Mhz)
>2. The existing DBMS(Proprietary) has problems with corruption.
>3. The existing DBMS will lock up when more than one person accesses a
>particular record. The database isn't really relational so each record has
>400-500 fields. Making changes using some of the system tools means the
>entire database is locked.
>4. Some information is not stored, simply because the DBMS cannot cope with
>the data. (Query Speeds)
>

I definitly understand why You want to get rid of that thing....

>
>I would like to implement a new DBMS on an NT Server. Yes, an NT server,
>sorry, sorry, sorry.
>I don't know whether to go with SQL Server or Oracle. Any opinions welcome
>:)
>
>I would like the following results in this order:
>

I know Oracle on NT very well, it runs perfectly. due too what I hear and read with
compareable performance with SQL server.

>1. Easy Development. I am not an idiot, just that I am one person team and
>I need something that is quick and easy to work with.
>

this points to SQL server. it has nice development tools and is a bit easier to
understand than oracle, which is more complex than SQL server (due to capability).

>2. Reliability. I don't want corrupted data. I want the users to be able
>to use the database without it always locking up or crashing. Daily
lockups
>are currently common.
>

oracle is considered to be one of the most robust RDBMSs, SQL server is not. sure SQL server is far away from beeing that nightmare of a system You are currently on anyway.

>3. Performance. I want to be able to do queries on the fly that are
>currently run as reports. Some libraries using this system are having
>problems doing backups because the reports take so long to run, I don't
want
>to run into those problems.
>
>4. Web Access / Remote Access. I need to be able to do queries on the web,
>most will be simple, but some need to be secured. In the future the
library
>will be in multiple locations, I need to be able to give regional access to
>the databases.
>
>5. Costs. I need something that is cost effective, we are on a tight
>budget. Currently we spend 30,000 (Canadian) for yearly licensing related
>to the current solution. The new database needs to be less than that. One
>time expenditures can be flexible up to 100,000 Canadian.
>

issue 4 and 5 should be satisfied by both systems. as for an application for university You should get the licenses cheaper than regulary.

>
>We have up to 30 concurrent users, with a growth of about 10% per year.
>

IMHO a strong argument for oracle, which is perfectly suited for smoothly scaling
up. maybe in 3 or 4 years boundaries are changed and You want to migrate to some
other OS like linux or something that does not exist yet, oracle will most likely support
this. IMHO a very strong argument against SQL server is that it is bundled with NT in
a way You will never get rid of it.

>
>Thanks!
>
>Trevor.
>

the strategy I would suggest is:

1. choose oracle8 as RDBMS server. develop a good security concept for data access.
2. choose oracle JDK developer suite for the client side, which is java and should run everywhere in a browser. run the same client apps as intranet applications and as WEB access tools on different security layers.

good luck,
--marcus

>
Received on Fri Mar 12 1999 - 06:05:06 CST