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: Oracle8/NT vs MS SQL 7.0

Re: Oracle8/NT vs MS SQL 7.0

From: Yuri Khait <yurikhait_at_home.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 01:34:50 GMT
Message-ID: <37B22540.D97CE466@home.com>


I did not do anything special, just installed Oracle8 on NT with all defaults, created my schema tables with primary keys) without specifying tablesapce and storage (everything default). Then I started loading data with SQLLOADER (direct method). Then I started creating a new datafiles when I ran out of space. After data was loaded I used Oracle Enterprise Manager to see how much space allocated and used in my tablespace (it was only one by default). There was some unused space but not much.

Yuri.

Jim Kennedy wrote:
>
> There is a difference in a datafile between used space and allocated space.
> This may be the problem. (In Oracle) For example: I could create a
> tablespace with a 2 gig datafile. Then I could do:
>
> create table example (col1 number not null, col2 varchar2(255)) tablespace
> mine storage(initial 100m next 1m);
>
> The tablespace itself would be 2 gigs in size. The table example would have
> 100 megs allocated to it, but the data in the table (none at this point) is
> taking up very little space.
>
> In Oracle I can also control how much of the space is used in a block to
> allow for row growth on updates. If I am going to insert rows into a table
> that is readonly from there on out I would specify a low percent free
> number. If I was going to have a table that had a lot of updates to it I
> would specify a higher percent free number.
>
> I think this may be the answer to what you are seeing. There probably are
> some storage differences between Oracle and MS SQL server, but I am sure the
> differences are fairly small and would depend upon the data.
> Jim
>
> Yuri Khait <yurikhait_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:37B0D7DB.C9CF6800_at_home.com...
> > I've found that it takes 3-4 times more disk space to store the same
> > amount of data(including indexes) in Oracle8 than in MS SQL 7.0 I could
> > not find any documents which compare disk storage on Oracle and MS SQL
> > 7.0. I have 60GB database on MS SQL 7.0, according to my tests it will
> > take > 200GB in Oracle.
> > Any comments ?????
> >
> > Tnx,
> > Yuri.
Received on Wed Aug 11 1999 - 20:34:50 CDT

Original text of this message

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