Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

From: Stefan Skoglund <stetson_at_ebox.tninet.se>
Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 19:10:14 +0200
Message-ID: <373712F6.FA6985EB@ebox.tninet.se>


Arvin Meyer wrote:
>
> Even without the obvious logical conclusion that both NT and SQL-Server take
> far less training and administration cost than Either Oracle or Linux. (I
> can install and configure both NT and SQL-Server in less time than Linux can
> be installed and configured, and I could probably add in physically building
> the server before Oracle could be installed)

Because you haven't really worked with UNIX before.

>
> Even without that. I point to Larry Ellison's Million Dollar Challenge.
> While it wasn't using Linux, because Linux couldn't handle the number of
> processors required or more than .9 Gb of memory, Microsoft beat the Oracle
> challenge and spent $600K to the Oracle $10 Million. That's more than 16
> times cheaper!

Yes, the test was done on a Ultra Enterprise 10000 with solaris 6 i think.
Current linux kernels scales to 8 processors. And that kernel has been production quality for half a year now.

>
> Linux does NOT cost nothing. In a business climate time is money. It costs
> in time to train, it costs in salaries or consultant fees to implement, and
> it costs in loss of productivity for that time. When time is factored, Linux
> is many times more expensive than NT.

  1. What did you eat whily you learned MS software ??
  2. Every UNIX admin also needs food occasionally.
  3. A good UNIX admin can roll out an working oracle in a pretty short time too. The hard thing will be getting the applications running.
  4. Linux now supports machines with around 2 Gb memory and big RAID systems both raid 0, 1 and 10.

What i'm saying is that solaris 7, hp-ux 11 and aix 4 together with oracle, sybase or informix is a cheaper platform than NT and MS SQL if the system demands is big enough. Some NT users have computer rooms with upwards of 50
NT machines running a big database. HOW cost effective is that compared with
one big Ultra or AIX machine ???

An installation of Linux running on PC servers or Sun Ultra machines together with Oracle or Informix will beat NT with a handsome margin and with less
hardware too !!

You need trained people to run it but the current popularity of Linux should warrant that !!
Linux is simply fun and a fair number of Linux savvy people is gonna as DBA's. Received on Mon May 10 1999 - 12:10:14 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US