Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Randy Baker wrote:
> =

> Frédéric BROUARD wrote in message <3731DA63.51250AC6_at_simog.com>...
> >AJ wrote:
> >
> >> >1 - Oracle runs on more plateforms than Microsoft SQL Server
> >>
> >> And your point is? This is a concern only if considering a very lar=
ge
> >>
> >> database. Or you just don't like the wintel conglomerate.
> >> Personnally, I
> >> try to base decisions on what's best for the customer (most
> >> cost-effective)
> >> not on my personal preferences.
> >>
> >
> >There is one thing I am sure is thta the total cost (production+admin)=

> >is smaller with Netware Oracle rather than NT SQL Server. My company h=
ad
> >statistics about that !!!
> >
> =

> FYI, one of our customers bought Oracle 8.0.3 for Netware to host our
> database and was basically dead in the water for 6 weeks because of
> unpredictable ORA-602 errors. Even with an exact duplicate of his data =
on
> our NT 8.0.3 system, we could not reproduce the problem, and the Oracle=
 TAR
> on the issue ended up being closed without a solution.
> =

> Our "fix" was to move the poor soul back to Oracle 7.3.4. So much for O=
racle
> on Netware...

8.0.3 was the first version of Oracle8. Version 8.0.5.1 works very fine. Upgrading
to the first version of anything is dangerous. Does anyone remember the demo given
by Bill Gates about then new Windows 98? The one when PC crashed on national TV
when such an exotic operation as connecting the scanner was attempted? That is
what happens with the first version of anything. Upgrading to the first version of anything isn't very smart. -- =

Mladen Gogala Received on Fri May 07 1999 - 07:47:09 CDT