Re: SQL-SERVER vs. Oracle

i agree with Sybrand ...SQL Server cries like with a large sized data. And you just cant beat OLAP services of Oracle (EXPRESS) as compared to the Olap services provided by M$...Express performs well on anyday as compared to the Olap services of M$

        Oracle does have a GUI but it is really good if you learn through the command line utility ..by that u go deeper to the details and u get the things right and u get the fundamentals right though it takes some time to learn but then thats the price u have to pay for it

~Parvinder

Sybrand Bakker wrote:

> I wouldn't reply, both parties have their advocates, and of course I don't
> believe in Sqlserver, or any other microsux product that simply has been
> bought. Sqlserver and Sybase once where the same, same story with OS/2,
> before Microsoft decided to bail out. Anyway..
> 'They have been accustomed to everything via the command line'
> You are not saying Oracle doesn't have a GUI interface, do you. That's
> simply not true. You may not like it but it does have one. However, as we
> all know those GUI gadgets usually have so many defaults, people don't know
> anymore what's really going on. Even if you do have a GUI interface, I would
> force novices to learn it the hard way. They should know what they are
> doing...
>
> Hth,
>
> --
> Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
> Mike Carter <mike_at_delriotech.com> wrote in message
> news:ur2i4.52631$905.1058077_at_news5.giganews.com...
> > MS SQL Server is much easier to pick-up on and learn if you're a new DBA.
> > Don't let its ease of use let you think that it can't compete well with
> > Oracle. I have extensive experience in both of these technologies (SQL
> > Server 6.5 / 7.0 and Oracle 8i), and I've had to learn them both on my
> own.
> > SQL Server 6.5 was extremely stable but lacked a little functionality that
> > 7.0 has taken care of.
> >
> > As far as a database solution for Windows NT, I would definately give
> > Microsoft the edge here. You can do everything you need to do to a
> database
> > from the SQL Server GUI tool (Enterprise Manager). Oracle's attempt at
> > recreating this product for their database falls well short. Of course,
> this
> > doesn't really bother Oracle DBAs because they've become accustomed to
> doing
> > everything via the command line. Not only in the GUI useless (except to
> > view objects and, on a limited scale, create/alter objects), but Oracle
> > requires way too much digging around in the NT file system and registry.
> No
> > DBA should ever have to worry about registry entries, ever!!! MS-SQL
> gives
> > you the added advantage of running over plain old IP or named pipes
> without
> > the overhead of wrapping a Net8 over it as well.
> >
> > I don't mean to show a bias here, but the bottom line is, if you want a
> > stable and easy to use solution running on NT, my vote is MS SQL Server
> > 7.0....hands down.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Owen Southwood <owen_at_listers.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:948387115.9283.0.nnrp-08.c2de2f84_at_news.demon.co.uk...
> > > Of course, I meant "SQL-Server" not just "SQL" !! sorry.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
Received on Tue Jan 25 2000 - 02:20:44 CST