Re: Oracle vs Sybase (clarification please)

> I work with both Oracle and Sybase and my experience says the following:

Well I first saw MS-Sql 4.2 and then learned it came from Sybase. I guess they have diverged a little since then :)

> If you want to spend LOTS of money, go for Oracle. IT's powerful, has lots
> of features and toys,
> but needs pretty powerful (expensive) hardware to run on, and be babysited
> by dedicated DBA.

it runs on the same h/w that SQL or Sybase runs on, our specs are the same for either. Most of our clients don't have a dedicated DBA. What would the dedicated BDA do all day? Freecell? Where did this impression come from? If pre 7.x was that bad how did it ever become popular? Strange.

> Same performance level with Sybase, could be reached using LESS powerful
> hardware,
> and no babysitting will be needed at all.

hmmm....and what if you really do need more power?

> This makes me think Oracle had to pay some really "high price" for its
> features.

We were running 75% Oracle then their pricing went through the roof, and lately have seen a lot of MS-SQL. Better be careful Larry, your driving people away!

JKL <snip>
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Thu Jun 14 2001 - 17:02:38 CDT