Hello,
I am doing some comparison testing between SQL Server and Oracle for
evaluation of possible migration of existing app from SQL server to Oracle.
The tests involve doing full table Updates (e.g. Update table1 set col1 =
5; - this is basically what our system does!!) on 500,000 rows. Running this
on Oracle 8.1.6 on Sun Enterprise 450 server /Solaris 8 (fairly old
hardware)with files spread across 3 disks , I can get this to run at about
40-45 secs; with SQL Server 7 on a Compaq server with Raid 5 (3 disks) and
1.1 Gb CPU(server approx 6 months old) this takes about 3 - 4 secs. The
problem with Oracle seems to be the I/O sub-system and the amount of
physical writes done to datafiles and rollback files(also redo of course),
and I'm not sure if when SQL Server completes transaction it has completed
the writes to disk as Oracle has which makes comparison difficult. I think
maybe the big difference in times I am seeing is combination of architecture
differences(SQL Server would only do two writes to Transaction Logs and
datafiles) and hardware differences (plus I am not using a Volume manager on
the Unix server). Has anyone similar experience of testing SQL Server and
Oracle, is Oracle slow at Updates, is it the hardware or both or ...??
thanks.
Garrick.
Received on Wed Jan 02 2002 - 07:37:39 CST
