Re: SQL server Vs Oracle

Arvin Meyer wrote:
>
> David wrote in message <_bi_2.780$i4.68153_at_alfalfa.thegrid.net>...
> >
> >How do you think MS is able to run their entire site using IIS? They have a
> >massive server farm to make up for NT's scalability weakness. So in their
> >case, using more hardware WAS the solution!
>
> I agree with everything but the NT scalability weakness part. In my view
> that's the strength. The same strength that lets an army of ants overcome
> almost any obstacle. Distributed computing, in my view, has far more
> potential than the largest O/S.
>
> >>If that was a solution, why is it that my 450MHz PII PC does run Word97
> >>much, much slower than my 486-66 PC running Word2? You will NEVER
> >>reap the benefits of faster hardware because it will ALWAYS require
> >>a version of software that is bloated enough to grind it to a halt. 'Nuff
> >said?
>
> That's funny, Word 97 runs almost as fast as Word 2 did on my 486DX33 with
> 16 Mb. It's almost instant on my PII400.
>

NT WKS takes 16M min. Word takes another 10M on a good day. You figure out the amount of swapping.
There is no way it runs OK (sit while doing nothing maybe). I have Word running (as I write this) on a dual PII 400 WKS with 256M and UW SCSI drives and when running multiple other apps (Delphi C/S, TOAD, OEM, Netscape, ReflectionsX, etc. Word consumes vast amounts of CPU and causes swapping even though there is plenty of free memory. And this is with FindFast removed. Before that it would bring the machine to it knees.
A guess we have different definitions of "almost instant".

Stilian Received on Wed May 12 1999 - 14:33:03 CDT